DRAFT

GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN and

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

CARL SANDBURG HOME NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Henderson County, North Carolina

The National Park Service (NPS) uses general management planning to establish the resource conditions and visitor

experiences that should be achieved and maintained at a specific unit of the National Park System over time. The purpose

of the proposed federal action described in this Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement is to

provide a clearly defined direction for resource protection and visitor use at Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site for

a period of 15-20 years. Three alternative management approaches and a no-action alternative are analyzed in this document.

The Sandburg Center alternative is the NPS preferred alternative. In it, Sandburg related cultural resources would be accessible

to a worldwide audience in ways that both protect and preserve those resources and promote a greater understanding and

appreciation of the contributions of Carl Sandburg to this nation. The Sandburg Center concept would provide visitors

with additional interpretive opportunities by creating multi use interpretive spaces in historic structures, establishing a new

visitor center on property outside of the existing boundary of the park, and expanding the visitor information station near

the park entrance.

The Paths of Discovery alternative encourages park managers to look outside established park boundaries and make full

use of local and regional resources in a true partnership relationship. Park managers would work closely with local government

and civic leaders to identify and implement creative methods to enhance and protect both park resources and local quality

of life values. The Paths of Discovery concept compliments the park’s traditional high quality interpretive and educational

programs with additional outdoor interpretive media and walking opportunities. An new visitor center located on property

outside of the existing boundary of the park would be established in a partnership arrangement with the local community.

Visitor orientation would be improved by expanding the visitor information station near the park entrance.

The Connemara Lifestyle alternative encourages visitors to experience a site much as Carl Sandburg knew it. Park management

would focus on maintaining the historic scene to closely represent the time period of the Sandburg residency by controlling

as many non-historic intrusions as practical. NPS quality interpretive and educational programs are provided on-site and

at local schools. Additional interpretive opportunities would be available at an expanded visitor information station near

the park entrance.

In all alternatives, the park would continue to provide NPS quality guided tours of the Sandburg residence and maintain the

historic landscape at a high level of integrity. Opportunities for walking would be available and managed to maintain the

historic character of the site. The interiors of one or more historic structures could be rehabilitated to support interpretation

or administrative needs. The parking area near the Front Lake would be expanded and additional parking would be

provided at a location outside the current boundary of the park. The existing amphitheater adjacent to the Sandburg

residence would be relocated to a less intrusive location and the trailer restroom would be replaced by an appropriately

designed modern facility at the same location.

Potential environmental impacts that would result from implementation of the alternatives are addressed in the document.

Comments on this document should be sent to:

Connie Hudson Backlund, Superintendent

Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

1928 Little River Road

Flat Rock, North Carolina 28731

E-mail: carl_superintendent@nps.gov

United States Department of the Interior  National Park Service Page i
General Management Plan  E x e c u t i v e S u m m a r y

3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Draft General Management Plan / Environmental Impact

Statement presents and analyzes four alternative management

plans (three action and one no action alternatives) and their

potential environmental impacts at Carl Sandburg Home

National Historic Site. Each alternative proposes a different

management philosophy to guide resource protection and

visitor use decisions over the next 15-20 years.

Purpose and Need for Action

The park bases its current management decisions on guidance

set forth in a 1971 park master plan, 1977 development concept

plan, and 1996 master plan amendment. Over time, higher

visitation, shifting local and regional demographics, and

updated NPS policy guidelines have rendered these plans

obsolete.

Some of the more significant local and regional trends

impacting the park are:

The populations of Hendersonville and Flat Rock are

growing at a steady rate. Although firm statistics on all

aspects of visitor use are not available, it is apparent that

the number of visitors to the park is increasing along with

the area’s population.

Residential home development and land subdivision

associated with this growth are causing the character of

the landscape surrounding the park to become more

suburban in nature.

The local community has traditionally used the trail

system at the park for walking. As recreational use

increases, additional management actions are needed to

avoid adverse impacts to historic trails and the historic

scene as well as to ensure a quality visitor experience for

all.

At times, visitors are discouraged from visiting the site by

a shortage of open parking spaces in the existing parking

area.

Park Mission

Each unit of the National Park System is provided guidance for

how it is to be managed by the Presidential proclamation or

Congressional legislation that authorizes and establishes it.

The Presidential or Congressional intent for a park unit is

further interpreted by the park and expressed as three kinds of

statements: mission, purpose, and significance. Collectively

these statements provide the foundation for sound decisionmaking at the park. All statements for Carl Sandburg Home

NHS were reviewed and refined as part of the general

management planning process.

Mission Statement

Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site is dedicated to

preserving the legacy of Carl Sandburg and communicating

the stories of his works, life, and significance as an American

poet, writer, historian, biographer of Abraham Lincoln, and

social activist. The Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

preserves and interprets the farm, Connemara, where

Sandburg and his family lived for the last 22 years of his life

(1945-1967).

Purpose Statements

The purpose of Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site is:

to carry on the legacy of Carl Sandburg’s works and life

for the benefit of future generations through preservation,

interpretation, education, and inspiration.

to preserve Carl Sandburg’s last home, associated

structures and landscape, original furnishings, personal

belongings, and library.

Significance Statements

Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site is significant

because:

the site is where one of America’s most versatile and

recognized writers completed a literary career that

captured and recorded America’s traditions, struggles,

and dreams in his poetry, histories, biographies, novels,

and folk songs. Sandburg relentlessly advocated for social

justice and his writings reflect a deep respect for people as

individuals.

the home, associated buildings, farm scene, wooded hills,

and gardens of Connemara embody the presence of Carl

Sandburg more vividly than any other place he lived.

the museum collection which preserves Carl Sandburg’s

personal belongings, furnishings, farm equipment, library,

and papers, provides a unique and rare perspective of this

American author’s lifestyle, philosophy, intellectual

pursuits, and life experiences.

Prescriptive Management Zones

In order to meet desired visitor experiences, desired cultural

and natural resource conditions, and accommodate

appropriate activities and facilities, five prescriptive

management zones (PMZs) were developed. The five PMZs are

overlaid on the park in varying arrangements and locations to

best represent the particular intent or focus of each

management alternative.
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

4

Five PMZs are used in this GMP:

1. Historic Discovery Zone – designates areas that are

predominantly free of non period of significance

intrusions and where visitors may find solitude or a

contemplative experience at most times.

2. Historic Interaction Zone – designates areas that have a

high degree of historic integrity but also include

provisions for visitor education and resource

interpretation.

3. Visitor Services Zone – designates areas reserved for

visitor service infrastructure such as parking areas, visitor

information stations, non-historic walking trails, and

comfort stations. Visitors enter the park only through the

visitor services zone.

4. Park Services Zone – designates areas reserved for park

administrative and maintenance activities. Visitors

generally do not enter a park service zone.

5. Amphitheater Relocation Zone – designates three

preferred areas where the existing amphitheater would be

relocated.

Alternative Plans

When considered together, the alternatives represent the

diversity of public comments and suggestions received during

the planning process. Three action and one no action

alternatives are considered and analyzed in the document:

1. Sandburg Center alternative

2. Paths of Discovery alternative

3. Connemara Lifestyle alternative

4. No Action alternative

Common Actions Associated with the Action

Alternatives

The following common actions occur in the three action

alternatives:

A Congressionally legislated boundary expansion would allow

the park to acquire properties or interests in properties outside

the currently authorized boundary of the park. In all

alternatives, approximately 1 to 2 acres would be acquired for

use as a parking area. The new parking area would be a

separate entity in the Connemara Lifestyle alternative but

combined with a new visitor center in the Sandburg Center

and Paths of Discovery alternatives.

In all alternatives, historic structure exteriors would be

preserved or restored to the period of significance.

Recommendations for specific treatments or maintenance

techniques of historic structures are beyond the scope of this

document and would be determined in a more detailed

Historic Structures Report or similar implementation level

plan.

Over time, all administration and maintenance uses of historic

structure interiors would be relocated to the park services or

visitor services zones with the exception of the basement of

the main house which would continue to function as a

bookstore, visitor contact area, and assembly point for house

tours. Historic structure interiors from which administrative

or maintenance activities are removed would be restored to

period of significance condition and opened for visitation or

adapted for use as an interpretive program area. In no

instance will a historic structure remain unoccupied or not be

maintained after administrative or maintenance uses are

relocated.

The existing amphitheater would be relocated to one of three

alternative sites. Once relocated, the landscape at the existing

amphitheater site would be restored to period of significance

condition.

The existing trailer comfort station would be replaced with an

appropriately designed new facility at the same location. An

area defined by a 40-foot radius extending outward from the

center point of the existing trailer unit is designated as a

Visitor Service Zone to accommodate the replacement facility.

The existing visitor information station by Front Lake would

be expanded by 500 to 1,000 square feet (SF) and renovated to

enhance its interpretive and visitor orientation functions.

The parking area in the visitor services zone by Front Lake

would be enlarged to accommodate approximately 10

additional vehicles in each alternative. It is expected that

construction of the enlarged parking area would necessitate

removal of the three existing bus parking spaces. The

implementation of this parking expansion would be

contingent on making alternative parking arrangements for

buses.

Additional visitor service infrastructure would be permitted

within the visitor services zone. Potential additions include:

vehicle and pedestrian circulation system improvements.

additions and/or modifications to existing walking trails.

additional and/or modifications to existing outdoor

interpretive exhibits and waysides.

additional and/or modifications to existing visitor

amenities such as benches, walkways, drinking fountains,

etc.

The volunteers parking area would be enlarged to

accommodate up to 20 total vehicles.

The Sandburg Center Alternative

The Sandburg Center alternative is the proposed action, the

NPS preferred alternative and the environmentally preferred

alternative.

 Executive Summary 
General Management Plan  E x e c u t i v e S u m m a r y

5

In this alternative, the park serves as a national and worldwide

focal point for learning about Carl Sandburg. Access to

Sandburg information, literature, and research would be

enhanced through an extensive internet database and other

high technology mass media formats. Visitors who come to the

site in person would find extraordinary opportunities to

participate in interpretive programs. The alternative provides

high quality museum space where visitors can gain additional

access to information and objects currently housed in the

museum preservation facility.

Providing high quality interpretive venues is seen as an

essential component of the alternative. Additional venues

would be created by rehabilitating one or more historic

structures near the main house or barn for interpretive

program areas, renovating the existing Front Lake visitor

information station to improve its interpretive and visitor

services function, and creating a visitor interpretive center

outside the current authorized boundary of the park.

A Congressionally legislated boundary expansion of up to 110

acres would provide critical views and boundary protection.

The specific area to be included is shown on the Sandburg

Center alternative PMZ map in Chapter Two. Because these

areas were never owned by the Sandburg’s, additional walking

trails could be added without compromising the historic

integrity of Connemara.

In addition, authorization to acquire approximately 3 to 5

acres for a 5,000 SF visitor center, parking for approximately

60 cars, and associated landscaping would be included. Given

the unpredictable availability of funding and property, an exact

location for the visitor center and parking area cannot be

identified at this time; however, any selected site would be

located west of Highway 25 and south of Little River Road in

the Village of Flat Rock.

Any property considered for acquisition would be purchased

under a willing seller/willing buyer arrangement.

Paths of Discovery Alternative

The Paths of Discovery alternative acknowledges the

important bond between the park, local and regional

governments, and park neighbors and relies upon its

traditionally close association with them to protect and

enhance common resource and quality of life values.

Recognizing that many people visit the park specifically to

enjoy its pastoral beauty, the alternative strategically blends the

community’s desire for additional walking opportunities with

the mission and overall function of the National Historic Site

by adding a pedestrian only interpretive trail that connects the

visitor entrance area with the historic back gate and the barn

area. In turn, the park would look outward to the community

to help meet internal park challenges such as the need for

additional visitor service and administrative infrastructure.

A visitor center would be created in a new or existing structure

on property purchased or leased outside the current

authorized boundary of the park. The visitor center would be

a multiuse facility that accommodated both park and

community needs. It would be developed in partnership with

preservation groups, friends groups, individuals, and/or local,

county, and state governments to reduce development and/or

maintenance costs to all participants. The park would use its

portion of the shared facility to provide additional Sandburg

interpretive opportunities and additional visitor contact and

orientation services. Specific details regarding such

partnerships would be developed at a future date in a

memorandum of understanding or partnership agreement.

A Congressionally legislated boundary expansion of up to 110

acres would provide critical views and boundary protection.

The specific area to be included is shown on the Paths of

Discovery alternative PMZ map in Chapter Two. Because these

areas were never owned by the Sandburg’s, additional walking

trails could be added without compromising the historic

integrity of Connemara.

In addition, if necessary, a Congressionally legislated

boundary expansion of approximately 3 to 5 acres would be

undertaken to facilitate purchase or lease of a suitable site for

a 5,000 SF visitor center and parking. The visitor center and

parking area would be located west of Highway 25 and south

of Little River Road.

Any property considered for acquisition would be purchased

under a willing seller/willing buyer arrangement.

Connemara Lifestyle Alternative

The Connemara Lifestyle alternative directs the park to focus

its resources on preserving the site’s historic landscape,

structures, and furnishings at the highest level of integrity.

High quality interpretive and educational programs would be

available on site and at local schools.

A Congressionally legislated boundary expansion would

authorize the selection and acquisition of approximately 1 to 2

acres for a 60-car parking area outside the currently

authorized boundary of the park. The parking area would be

located west of Highway 25 and south of Little River Road.

A Congressionally legislated boundary expansion of up to 25

acres would provide critical views and boundary protection.

The specific area to be included is shown on the Connemara

Lifestyle alternative PMZ map in Chapter Two.

Any property considered for acquisition would be purchased

under a willing seller/willing buyer arrangement.

Primary access to the objects and information contained in the

museum collection would be provided at the main house.

Some additional interpretive capacity would be provided at the

 Executive Summary 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

6

expanded visitor information station by Front Lake and

through the internet.

The Connemara Lifestyle alternative acknowledges the

uncertainty of receiving significantly increased federal funding

by taking a more a conservative approach to increasing park

infrastructure, staff, and maintenance responsibility than the

other alternatives.

No Action Alternative

The No Action alternative maintains the current management

approach at the park. Resource protection and visitor use

opportunities would continue on their present course without

change in resource management capability, visitor programs,

or facilities. Cultural and natural resources would be

maintained in their present condition and traditional use

patterns would endure.

High quality interpretive tours and programs would continue

to be provided at main house, amphitheater, barn area, and in

local schools. Historic artifacts would be professionally cared

for and preserved in the Museum Preservation Center.

Museum objects would continue to be exhibited at main

house and in some historic structures. Existing trails would be

maintained and managed in current conditions.

Park management would continue as an active, responsible,

and contributing member of the local community. The park

would continue to be funded and staffed at a level comparable

to current conditions. The existing visitor parking area would

remain unchanged. The amphitheater would not be relocated,

improved, or enlarged. The trailer restroom would not be

improved and remain at its present location.

Potential Environmental Impacts

Associated with the Action

Alternatives

Potential environmental impacts vary between the action

alternatives primarily in response to the way each provides

additional venues for interpretation activities. This summary

highlights the most significant potential impacts. A complete

discussion of environmental impacts is included in the draft

plan. The reader should be aware that prior to implementing

any action, detailed planning documents and an appropriate

mitigation strategy would be created in full compliance with

the National Environmental Policy Act, the National Historic

Preservation Act, NPS policy, and coordination with the State

Historic Preservation Officer and the general public.

Potential Impacts to Cultural Resources

All action alternatives propose a 500-1,000 SF expansion of the

existing visitor information station, creation of a 10 space

parking area, and the potential addition of trail side amenities

in the visitor services zone. Such actions would increase the

number of non period-of-significance objects in the vicinity of

Front Lake. The impacts of these additions, while potentially

significant, would be reduced by using sound design and

construction practices. The historic view from the front porch

of the main house is considered the cultural resource most

affected by these changes.

All action alternatives relocate the existing amphitheater to

one of three preferred locations. Up to two acres of the

historic landscape would be modified to create the new facility.

The impact of relocating the amphitheater on cultural

resources is not considered significant and would be reduced

by restoring the existing location to historic conditions and by

the use of sound design and construction practices at the new

site.

The Sandburg Center alternative would rehabilitate one or

more historic building interiors to provide interpretive

program areas near the main house and barn areas. This

action would cause the loss of some historic fabric within the

rehabilitated structures but impacts would be reduced by

removing existing administrative and maintenance functions

from historic structures, the accurate documentation of the

historic resource prior to undertaking any rehabilitation

activity, and employment of sensitive design and construction

techniques.

The Paths of Discovery alternative would cause grading and

vegetation removal on the shoulder of Little River Road and

parallel to back drive along the proposed route of the 3⁄4 mile

long pedestrian interpretive connector trail. The impacts of

this action, while potentially significant are considered able to

be reduced by the use of sound design and construction

practices. The historic view of the side pastures from Little

River Road is considered the cultural resources most affected

by the potential changes. The new trail parallel to back drive

would be located in woodland areas and be heavily screened

from historic views.

All alternatives increase public access to cultural resources

contained in the museum collection. In some instances, added

access may increase exposure of these resources to the

harmful effects of light, humidity, and heat. The Sandburg

Center and Paths of Discovery alternatives have the highest

potential for causing such impacts because they create the

greatest number of new venues. The probability of significant

negative impacts to these sensitive resources is considered low

and able to be reduced by professional museum collection

management and preservation techniques.

Potential Impacts to Interpretation,

Education, and Museum Operations

Interpretation and education opportunities are significantly

enhanced in the Sandburg Center and Paths of Discovery by

the addition of interpretive program and exhibit areas in the

 Executive Summary 
General Management Plan  E x e c u t i v e S u m m a r y

7

new visitor center. The Sandburg Center alternative

significantly enhances the park’s ability to provide interpretive

programs by creating additional interpretive areas inside the

park. The Paths of Discovery alternative enhances the visitor’s

ability to experience and learn about the historic landscape by

the addition of a 3⁄4 mile interpretive trail.

All action alternatives propose increasing interpretation,

education, and access to museum resources by a small

expansion of the existing visitor information station, use of

high technology mediums like the internet, and additional

waysides in the visitor services zone near front lake. Museum

operations are significantly enhanced in the Sandburg Center

and Paths of Discovery by the creation of additional climate

controlled and secure exhibit environments in the new visitor

center.

Opportunities for visitors to engage in interactive Sandburgrelated programs are highest in the Sandburg Center

alternative. Opportunities for visitors to have increased access

to objects and information in the museum collection are

greatest in the Sandburg Center and Paths of Discovery

alternatives.

Potential Impacts to Natural Resources

Construction-related ground disturbing activities and selective

clearing of vegetation related to the creation of additional park

infrastructure could result in the relocation of certain wildlife

species to other locations inside or outside the park. No

threatened or endangered species have been identified within

the park. A globally rare but locally common plant association

exists on the nine granite domes in the park. No construction

related activity is anticipated in any alternative that would

impact these granite dome plant communities. None the less,

the NPS would consult with appropriate wildlife agencies

before initiating any ground disturbing activity to determine if

the proposed action represents an adverse affect on natural

resources and determine an appropriate mitigation strategy if

necessary.

The creation of an interpretive connector trail in the Paths of

Discovery alternative constitutes the largest potential removal

of vegetation in the action alternatives. Actions common to all

alternatives that would result in vegetation removal are

relocation of the amphitheater, expansion of the existing

visitor parking near Front Lake, expansion of the volunteers

parking near the barn area, and renovating the existing visitor

information station.

Potential Impacts to Quality of Life and

Socioeconomic Conditions

The site is a popular North Carolina tourism destination and

receives over 100,000 visitors each year. During peak visitation

periods, parking capacity is exceeded and vehicles circulate in

and out of the existing parking area in search of a free space.

Those unable to locate a free space often park on the shoulder

of Little River Road. The resulting mix of traffic congestion

and pedestrians is hazardous to both park visitors and local

residents. Increased parking capacity near the park entrance

would help alleviate this unsafe traffic situation by reducing

the need for on street parking and improving vehicle

circulation.

All action alternatives expand the existing parking area by 10

spaces and add a 60 vehicle parking area on property currently

outside the authorized boundary of the park. Potentially

higher traffic densities on residential portions of Little River

Road would be reduced by locating the new parking area as

close as possible to the front entrance of the park. The 60

vehicle parking area would be combined with a visitor center

in the Sandburg Center and Paths of Discover alternatives. A

60 vehicle parking is of sufficient size to satisfy the existing

parking shortfall and accommodate additional visitors drawn

to the new visitor center over the life of the plan.

The Sandburg Center alternative would attract visitors from a

worldwide audience. Visitors who come to the area to take

advantage of new opportunities at the park are potential

visitors to other regional tourism locations. Additional

programs would potentially increase the amount of time a

person stays in the park during a single visit and the frequency

of park visitors staying overnight in local lodgings. Additional

goods and services would be purchased from local businesses

to support increased program, maintenance, and

administrative activities at the park. Construction activity

associated with the new visitor center, renovated visitor

information station, and redesigned parking area in the visitor

services zone would provide a temporary boost to the local

and regional economy. Approximately nine permanent or part

time employment opportunities could be created over time.

The Paths of Discovery alternative would attract visitors from

a regional audience. Additional opportunities for walking and

viewing cultural resources will attract visitors who come to the

area to see nearby tourism locations. The amount of time a

person stays in the park during a single visit and the frequency

of park visitors staying overnight in local lodgings is expected

to increase but at a less significant rate than the Sandburg

Center alternative. Additional goods and services would be

purchased from local businesses to support increased

program, maintenance, and administrative activities at the

park. Construction activity associated with the new

interpretive trail, visitor center, and redesigned parking area in

the visitor services zone would provide a temporary boost to

the local economy. Approximately six permanent or part time

employment opportunities could be created over time.

The Connemara Lifestyle alternative would attract visitors

from a local and regional audience. The amount of time a

 Executive Summary 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

8

person stays in the park during a single visit and the frequency

of park visitors staying overnight in local lodgings is not

expected to increase significantly over existing conditions. The

park would continue to purchase goods and services from

local businesses to support programs, maintenance, and

administrative activities at the park. Construction activity

associated with the renovated visitor information station and

redesigned parking area in the visitor services zone would

provide a temporary boost to the local and regional economy.

Approximately three permanent or part time employment

opportunities could be created over time.

 Executive Summary 
General Management Plan  E x e c u t i v e S u m m a r y

9

 Executive Summary 
C a r l S a n d b u r g H o m e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c S i t e

10
General Management Plan  Contents

11

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract, i

Executive Summary, 3

Chapter 1. Purpose and Need for Action

Background Information, 15

Historic Context, 15

General Management Plans, 18

Need for a General Management Plan, 18

Park Mission, 20

GMP Planning Process, 20

Special Mandates, Laws, and Policies, 21

Discussion of Planning Issues, 24

Major Decision Points, 28

Chapter 2. Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

Chapter Overview, 31

Prescriptive Management Zones, 31

Actions Common to all Alternatives, 36

Sandburg Center Alternative, 42

Paths of Discovery Alternative, 49

Connemara Lifestyle Alternative, 55

No Action Alternative, 60

Summary and Comparison, 62

Chapter 3. Affected Environment

Chapter Overview, 67

Mandatory Environmental Impacts, 67

Description of Existing Conditions, 68

Chapter 4. Environmental Consequences of the Proposal and Alternatives

Chapter Overview, 79

Methodology, 79

Assessment Categories and Factors, 80

Assessment of Potential Env. Impacts Associated with the No Action Alternative, 84

Assessment of Potential Env. Impacts Associated with the Sandburg Center Alternative, 90

Assessment of Potential Env. Impacts Associated with the Paths of Discovery Alternative, 97

Assessment of Potential Env. Impacts Associated with the Connemara Lifestyle Alternative, 104

Chapter 5. Consultation and Coordination

History of Public Involvement, 113

Draft GMP/EIS Public Review and Comment Period, 113

General Management Planning Team Personnel, 114

List of Recipients of Draft Plan, 114
C a r l S a n d b u r g H o m e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c S i t e

12

Appendix A. Authorizing Legislation, 117

Appendix B. Amphitheater Relocation

Summary of Assessment Process, 119

Scale of Assessment, 119

Factors and Criteria, 119

Selection of Preferred Locations, 122

Glossary, 129

References, 133

Index, 137

Images, Illustrations, and Tables

1-a Region and Vicinity Map, 16

1-b Aerial Photograph of Carl Sandburg Home NHS, 17

2-a Prescriptive Management Zone Highlights, 33

2-b Main House Area Comfort Station, 39

2-c Visitor Parking Area and Information Station, 40

2-d Volunteer Parking Area, 41

2-e Sandburg Center Prescriptive Management Zones, 45

2-f Sandburg Center Cost Estimate, 48

2-g Interpretive Trail Location, 49

2-h Paths of Discovery Prescriptive Management Zones, 51

2-i Paths of Discovery Cost Estimate, 54

2-j Connemara Lifestyle Prescriptive Management Zones, 57

2-k Connemara Lifestyle Cost Estimate, 59

2-l Existing Conditions/No Action Alternative, 61

2-m How Alternatives Address Major Decision Points, 63

2-n Features and Highlights of Alternatives, 64

2-o Factors, Advantages, and Importance of Alternatives, 65

3-a Main House Building Interiors, 70

3-b Barn Area Building Interiors, 71

3-c Profile of Visitors and Visitation, 72

3-d Aerial View of Vegetative Cover, 73

4-a Factors Assessment to Advantage Conversion Table, 80

4-b Factors, Assessments, and Importance Values, 82-83

B-1 Amphitheater Alternative Locations, 121

B-2 Factors, Assessments, and Importance Values, 124-127
General Management Plan  Contents

13

C h a p t e r O n e  Purpose and Need for Action

15

CHAPTER ONE

Background Information

Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site (NHS) was

established by act of Congress, Public Law 90-592 (82 Stat.

1154) on October 17, 1968 (see Appendix A). The 264 acre

property was acquired by the National Park Service (NPS)

from the Sandburg family in 1969. Subsequent to acquisition,

a program of renovations was undertaken by the NPS and the

site opened to visitors in 1974.

Carl Sandburg Home NHS is located in the Village of Flat

Rock, North Carolina. Flat Rock, on U.S. Highway 25, is 3

miles south of Hendersonville, in Henderson County (Figure

1-a). Hendersonville and Flat Rock are popular retirement

communities whose populations are growing at a steady rate.

Residential home development and land subdivision

associated with this growth are causing the character of the

landscape surrounding the park to become more suburban in

nature. Although firm statistics on visitor use are not available,

a nonscientific estimate suggests that 40,000 persons tour the

home and an additional 100,000 persons visit the grounds

each year. The number of visitors is expected to increase as

the regional tourism economy and local resident population

grow.

The NPS manages the Carl Sandburg Home NHS for the

purposes of interpreting the life and works of Carl Sandburg

and preserving the historic resources that illustrate his life on

the pastoral and forested farm property where he lived from

1945-1967. The NPS is dedicated to communicating the stories

of Carl Sandburg – his works, life, and significance as an

American poet, writer, historian, biographer of Abraham

Lincoln, and social activist.

Carl Sandburg Home NHS is composed primarily of the

original Sandburg estate, also known as Connemara. With the

exception of changes to improve visitor access and the

addition of a visitor information station, an administrative and

maintenance area, amphitheater, parking area, and restroom,

much of the grounds, structures, and furnishings of

Connemara exist essentially as they did during the period of

Carl Sandburg’s residence.

Generally, park resources can be categorized by association

with the main house, Carl Sandburg’s literary and musical

works, Mrs. Sandburg’s dairy goat farm operation, or

woodland. The core of the main house-associated elements

includes the main house and furnishings, subsidiary buildings

and their furnishings, associated trails, and the landscape

immediately surrounding those elements. The park’s museum

preservation center (MPC) preserves over 330,000 museum

objects and archives associated with Carl Sandburg’s life and

works. The principal features of the farm are the barn (which

includes facilities for milking goats), farm manager’s house,

barn garage, an equipment storage building, furnishings

associated with those structures and pasture land. A

representative number of each of three breeds of dairy goats

owned by the Sandburgs is maintained on the farm as an

interpretive tool. Approximately 75% of the park area is

covered by a mixed pine and hardwood forest (see Figure 1-b).

Historical Context

Carl Sandburg was already famous when he moved with his

family to the Blue Ridge mountains of western North Carolina

in 1945. Poet, minstrel, lecturer, biographer, and Pulitzer Prizewinning author, he had spent his lifetime championing social

justice and the American people through his writings and his

singing. Although, at 67, he was at an age when many people

retire, Sandburg was still actively working.

The estate had a long history - an ironic history for the

biographer of Abraham Lincoln - for Christopher Memminger,

who built the main house around 1838, had served from 1861 to

1864 as Secretary of the Confederate Treasury. Upon the death

of Memminger, the estate was sold to Colonel William Gregg,

who apparently never occupied the house. In 1900, textile

tycoon Captain Ellison Smyth purchased the estate and

renamed it Connemara to honor his Irish ancestry. Smyth’s

heirs sold it to the Sandburgs in 1945.

Sandburg’s wife, Lilian had discovered the mountain farm

named Connemara with their youngest daughter, Helga. The

farm had everything the family wanted, including a gentle

climate and ample pasture for Mrs. Sandburg’s goat herd and

PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

16

Hendersonville

Flat Rock

Carl Sandburg

Home NHS

26

25

Not to Scale

north

25

GA SC

TN

KY VA

NORTH CAROLINA

Carl Sandburg Home NHS

region_vicinity.eps

Figure 1-a. Region and Vicinity Map

 Background Information 
C h a p t e r O n e  P u r p o s e a n d N e e d f o r A c t i o n

17

Little River Road

U.S. H

ighway 25

U.S. H gi hway 25

Carl Sandburg Home

National Historic Site

General Management Plan

0 250 250 500 500 750 750 1000 1250

N FEET

Note: Scale is approximate

Note: Boundary locations are approximate

Map of Existing Conditions -- Site Map

Side Lake

Front Lake

Madonna Lak

air_map1.eps

Flat Rock Playhouse

Front Pasture

 Visitor Parking Area

Visitor Information Station

Side Pastures

Park Headquarters

and Maintenance Area

Park Boundary

Big Glassy Overlook

Volunteer's Parking Lot

Barn Area

Trail System

Elevation: 2740 ft.

Village of Flat Rock

Home

Figure 1-b. Aerial photograph of Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

 Background Information 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

18

seclusion for her husband’s writing. The Sandburgs moved

from Michigan with their three daughters, two grandchildren,

a library of 14,000 volumes, and the Chikaming goat heard.

Carl Sandburg would call it home for 22 years.

The years at Connemara were productive for Carl Sandburg.

He published poems, children’s literature, fiction, and nonfiction. He continued to travel, lecture, sing, and earn

accolades, including his second Pulitzer Prize. The family was

busy too. Mrs. Sandburg bred her prize-winning goats and

ran the farm business. Margaret helped her father, attending

to the library, and worked in her flower garden. Janet helped

on the farm, which was especially active when Helga and her

children, John Carl and Paula, lived there. Until her second

marriage and move from Connemara, Helga managed the

dairy operation with her mother. The grandchildren rode

horses and played in the woods and pastures.

Carl Sandburg kept late hours. He often worked most of the

night, while it was quiet and still, and slept until late in the

morning. After a midday meal he read, answered letters, and

wrote wherever his imagination took him - his upstairs office

or study, the living room, the front porch, or on the large

sloping rock behind the house.

There were frequent visitors at Connemara. A favorite guest

was the well-known photographer Edward Steichen, Mrs.

Sandburg’s brother and Carl Sandburg’s closest friend. Guests

or not, dinner was a social gathering for the family. Afterward

Sandburg would read aloud or sing with them. In the

afternoon or evening, he walked with his wife, children, or

friends along one of the winding paths or through the woods.

Carl Sandburg died at home on July 22, 1967. In 1969, the

Sandburg family sold the property and donated the contents

of the home to the NPS (with the notable exception of the

contents of his personal library which he sold to the University

of Illinois in 1955) to be preserved as the Carl Sandburg Home

NHS. Always a voice for the American people, Carl Sandburg

speaks to us still through his words, songs, and the beauty and

serenity of Connemara.

General Management Plans

General management planning constitutes the first phase of a

tiered planning and decision making process used by the NPS

to establish the resource conditions and visitor experiences

that should be achieved and maintained at a specific unit of

the national park system over time. It is NPS policy to

maintain an up-to-date general management plan (GMP) for

each unit of the national park system. GMPs are reviewed and

revised as necessary, generally every 15-20 years or as need

dictates.

General management planning, as suggested by its name, is

intended only to provide general guidance about the best way

to achieve desirable resource protection and visitor experience

goals. Specific details regarding facility construction,

interpretive program development, and maintenance

technique are examined in much greater detail during

subsequent implementation planning and design.

Recommendations made in GMPs are based on an analysis of

existing and potential resource conditions, desired visitor

experiences, environmental impacts (including natural,

cultural, and socioeconomic impacts), and costs of alternative

courses of action. GMPs are developed in consultation with

NPS program managers, park staff, interested parties, and the

general public.

In reaching decisions concerning future management of park

resources, the NPS seeks, to the extent possible, to reach

agreement among the park staff, NPS leadership, other

government agencies with jurisdiction by law or expertise, and

members of the public.

Need for a General Management

Plan at Carl Sandburg Home NHS

The governing planning documents at Carl Sandburg Home

NHS are nearing the end of their effective life span. Current

management decisions are made under the guidance of a 1971

park master plan, 1977 development concept plan, and a 1996

amendment to the park master plan that permitted specific

administrative uses in two historic structures.

Significant changes in volume and pattern of visitor use, local

and regional demographics, and new NPS policy guidelines

affect the park in ways these documents could not anticipate.

An overview of need for a new GMP is presented in the

following paragraphs. For easier understanding, needs are

categorized in relationship to the following core park

management values:

Cultural and Natural Resource Protection

Visitor Experience

Partnerships

Park Management

Cultural and Natural Resource Protection

Cultural and natural resources of the park are managed to

preserve the site’s appearance as it was during 1955-1965, the

period of Sandburg’s most productive years. Fifty historic

structures exist on the site, ranging from the Sandburg home

to a single stall donkey shed and rock walls. Over 330,000

artifacts, mostly books and former personal property of the

Sandburgs are preserved at the park. Many Sandburg artifacts

are available for viewing in their historical context at the

Sandburg home. While the Sandburg home is well maintained,

it cannot be considered a museum quality environment and

 General Management Plans 
C h a p t e r O n e  P u r p o s e a n d N e e d f o r A c t i o n

19

many of the objects displayed there are exposed to levels of

light, humidity, and heat that are less than optimum for long

term preservation. A 4,000 Square Foot (SF) museum

preservation center allows climate controlled storage of

objects too delicate or rare for display in the park. Many

objects that would be of interest to visitors cannot be

displayed for lack of a suitable venue.

Carl Sandburg Home NHS includes over 200 acres of forests

and 64 acres of pastures, hay fields, crop land, trails, and

gardens. Large white pines, hemlocks, yellow poplar (tulip

tree) and oak specimen trees line the drives, streams and

ponds of the property. Numerous rock outcrops occur

throughout the park, some of which contain vegetation

associations or ecogroups that are locally common but

considered rare on a global scale.

The local community has traditionally used the trail system at

the park for walking. As the number of trail users grows,

increased management actions are needed to avoid adverse

impacts.

Park Management Concerns:

Preservation of sensitive cultural resources must be

balanced against the desire to use them as an interpretive

resource. Often sensitive resources must be displayed in

an environment that is not optimal for preservation. Do

options exist for increasing access to cultural resources

currently in the museum preservation center without

exposing them to unfavorable climate conditions or

security risks?

Development pressures in the surrounding community

could potentially affect the historic appearance of the

park. What guidance can the GMP give park managers

when attempting to reduce visual intrusions to the historic

appearance of the NHS?

What options are available to better manage recreational

use and reduce its impacts on the natural and cultural

resources of the park?

Visitor Experience

Limited walking or hiking trails in the local community has

caused the primary visitor experience at the park to assume an

increasingly recreational tone. A local citizen group has

identified areas suitable for the construction of a greenway

trail system which could create additional walking trails

outside the park.

While acknowledging the responsibility of park managers to

protect the historic integrity of the park, it is important to

recognize that the park contains a large and scenic land base

that is attractive to those who might wish to use park resources

for activities not related to its historic significance. Park

managers must constantly weigh their desire to accommodate

these uses against the potential for undesirable intrusions on

the historic environment.

Park Management Concerns:

Does the recreational experience desired by some visitors

interfere with the mission of the park to interpret the life

and works of Carl Sandburg?

Is recreational use appropriate at the park and, if so, to

what extent can it be accommodated? What options are

available to better manage recreational use at the park?

Can visitor use be adequately controlled with multiple

access points? Are additional (new) trails appropriate

and if so, where? Should any current trails be eliminated?

Partnerships

Carl Sandburg Home NHS as been extraordinarily successful

establishing and maintaining partnership arrangements with

both public and private entities. The park has maintained a

mutually beneficial relationship with the State Theater of

North Carolina/Flat Rock Playhouse for almost 30 years. Over

14,000 volunteer service hours are donated to the park every

year by a variety of individuals. The park also benefits from a

very active and supportive “Friends” organization.

Park Management Concerns:

Is there potential for additional beneficial partnership

relationships?

How can existing relationships be strengthened?

What role can the GMP play in promoting and

strengthening partnership relationships?

Park Management

A variety of park management issues need to be addressed

during the GMP process.

Park Management Concerns:

A chronic parking shortage exists at the park. Can the

problem be resolved through a public/private

relationship? Is there room within the park to increase

parking capacity by the addition of new parking areas or

the expansion of an existing lot? Is acquisition of

additional land for parking a realistic option?

Several temporary structures such as restrooms near the

main house, amphitheater, and picnic area need to be

permanently sited if they are appropriate to keep.

Heavy trail use has resulted in compacted soils and a

greater need for trail maintenance.

 Need for a General Manangement Plan 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

20

What types of visitor services are appropriately provided

at the park and where are the most appropriate locations

for them?

A new GMP is needed to create a management framework

from which future park managers can implement programs

that preserve, protect, and interpret park resources and give

everyone with a major stake in the park an opportunity to

participate in the development of this framework.

Planning Team

The Carl Sandburg Home NHS GMP was conducted by an

interdisciplinary team of park managers and technical experts

in consultation with the general public and other

knowledgeable persons inside and outside the National Park

Service. Planning team members, technical advisors, and other

significant contributors are listed in Chapter V, Consultation

and Coordination.

Park Mission

Each unit of the national park system is provided guidance for

how it is to be managed by the Presidential proclamation or

Congressional legislation that authorizes and establishes it.

The Presidential or Congressional intent for a park unit is

further interpreted by the park and expressed as its mission.

Park mission contains three kinds of statements: mission,

purpose, and significance, which collectively provide the

foundation for sound decision-making at the park. Park

mission statements for Carl Sandburg Home NHS were

reviewed and refined as part of the general management

planning process.

Mission Statement

Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site is dedicated to

preserving the legacy of Carl Sandburg and communicating

the stories of his works, life, and significance as an American

poet, writer, historian, biographer of Abraham Lincoln, and

social activist. Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

preserves and interprets the farm, Connemara, where

Sandburg and his family lived for the last 22 years of his life

(1945-1967).

Purpose Statements

The purpose of Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site is:

to carry on the legacy of Carl Sandburg’s works and life

for the benefit of future generations through preservation,

interpretation, education, and inspiration.

to preserve Carl Sandburg’s last home, associated

structures and landscape, original furnishings, personal

belongings, and library.

Significance Statements

Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site is significant

because:

the site is where one of America’s most versatile and

recognized writers completed a literary career that

captured and recorded America’s traditions, struggles,

and dreams in his poetry, histories, biographies, novels,

and folk songs. Sandburg relentlessly advocated for social

justice and his writings reflect a deep respect for people as

individuals.

the home, associated buildings, farm scene, wooded hills,

and gardens of Connemara embody the presence of Carl

Sandburg more vividly than any other place he lived.

the museum collection which preserves Carl Sandburg’s

personal belongings, furnishings, farm equipment, library,

and papers, provides a unique and rare perspective of this

American author’s lifestyle, philosophy, intellectual

pursuits, and life experiences.

Carl Sandburg Home NHS GMP

Planning Process

The GMP process at Carl Sandburg Home NHS is being

conducted in four phases:

Scoping

Development and Analysis of Alternatives

Preparation and publication of a draft general

management plan/environmental impact statement

Revision and publication of a final general management

plan/environmental impact statement

Scoping

Information about the broad range of potential ideas, goals,

and objectives that park staff, technical experts, current and

potential visitors, other governmental agencies, traditional

users, regional residents, and the general public want the park

to achieve was gathered in a process called “Scoping”. Scoping

occurred continuously throughout the planning process.

The broad range of goals and objectives identified during the

scoping process are generally referred to as “Planning Issues”

and are examined in greater detail in the Discussion of Planning

Issues section of this chapter.

Development and Analysis of Alternatives

As might be expected, some of the ideas and information

different people wished included as an aspect of this GMP

were mutually compatible and others were not. Working in

conjunction with its many partners, the planning team drew

upon information gathered during scoping to formulate a

 Planning Process 
C h a p t e r O n e  P u r p o s e a n d N e e d f o r A c t i o n

21

range of management alternatives that both satisfied park

mission and incorporated as many ideas as possible. Each

potential alternative was rigorously analyzed and refined over

time by the planning team as part of the planning process.

A preferred alternative was selected using the Choosing by

Advantages (CBA) decision-making process. A more detailed

description of the selection and environmental analysis

process is provided in subsequent chapters.

Draft Plan

This document represents the draft general management plan

and environmental impact statement. Your thoughts and

comments are welcomed and can be transmitted to the park

superintendent using the contact information shown in the

abstract of this document and Chapter 5.

Final Plan

After the official comment period for the draft plan has

expired and the draft document is updated to reflect any

additional public input, a final general management plan and

environmental impact statement will be prepared and made

available for public review.

Special Mandates, Laws, and Policies

All decisions made through general management planning

must fit within the broad parameters established by: 1) the

park’s particular mission and mission goals; 2) any special

mandates or commitments that may apply to the park; and 3)

the large body of laws and policy applicable to all units of the

national park system. The purpose of this section is to clarify

and articulate the parameters established by special mandates,

administrative commitments, and service-wide laws and

policy.

Special mandates

Special mandates are park specific. Planning teams are

instructed by NPS policy to look for them in the park’s

establishing legislation. In this case, the establishing

legislation, as amended, for Carl Sandburg Home NHS

(Appendix A) does not provide specific direction for managing

the site.

Administrative commitments are generally defined as

agreements that have been reached through formal,

documented processes with other Federal or state agencies

that refer to the co-management of specific natural or cultural

resources. The park has a long standing Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU) with the State Theater of North

Carolina (Flat Rock Playhouse) that allows the use of each

others parking areas for overflow parking. All alternatives will

assume the continuation of this mutually beneficial

arrangement.

A MOU with the Blue Ridge Parkway provides Carl Sandburg

Home NHS with one law enforcement ranger. Provision of the

ranger is contingent on staff availability at Blue Ridge Parkway

and availability of funds at Carl Sandburg Home NHS to pay

related expenses. Historically, a law enforcement ranger is

provided one or two days per week and at special events where

many visitors are expected. All alternatives would add a full

time law enforcement ranger to the Sandburg staff. The

current MOU would be continued until a ranger was hired.

All alternatives would continue to honor the existing MOUs

with the Blue Ridge Fire and Rescue and Valley Hill Fire

Department that provide fire and rescue emergency services to

the park.

Service-wide laws and policy

Management of national park system units is guided by

numerous congressional acts and executive orders. The NPS

has also established policies for managing the units under its

stewardship. Much of basic good park management is

specified in laws and policies and in all but the most

extraordinary circumstances, planning approaches that fall

outside of existing laws and policies are not considered in

general management planning. While a detailed discussion of

laws and policies affecting park management is beyond the

scope of this document, those that most significantly

influenced the development of alternatives are described

under the following topics:

Visitor experience and use

Management of cultural and natural resources

Visitor and employee safety

Actions outside the park

Visitor experience and use

Enjoyment of park resources and values by the people of the

United States is a part of the fundamental purpose of all parks.

Current service-wide laws and policies require that the

following visitor experience and use conditions be achieved at

the park (Sources: NPS Organic Act, 2001 NPS Management

Policies, Americans with Disabilities Act, Architectural Barriers

Act, and Rehabilitation Act).

Visitors will have opportunities to enjoy the park in ways

that leave park resources unimpaired for future

generations.

Visitors will understand and appreciate park values and

resources and have the information necessary to adapt to

the park environments.

Opportunities for forms of enjoyment that are uniquely

suited and appropriate to the superlative natural and

cultural resources will be provided in the park .

 Special Mandates, Laws, and Policies 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

22

Visitors will have access to activities that are inspirational,

educational, healthful, and otherwise appropriate to the

park environment. A broad range of visitor experiences

will be available including opportunities for structured

educational and interpretive programs as well as

personalized experiences that do not require the formality

of program or structure.

Basic visitor needs will be met in keeping with the park

purposes.

All people of the United States, that is, people who directly

experience the preserve and those who appreciate it by

afar may derive benefit (including scientific knowledge)

and inspiration from the preserve, as well as other forms

of enjoyment.

Park recreational uses will be promoted and regulated. A

wide range of techniques are considered when managing

recreational uses to avoid adverse impacts on park

resources and values, or desired visitor experiences.

Examples of appropriate techniques include visitor

information and educational programs, separation of

conflicting uses by time or location, hardening sites,

modifying maintenance practices, and permit and

reservation systems.

To the extent feasible, facilities, programs, and services in

the park are accessible to and usable by all people,

including those with disabilities.

Planning Parameters: Laws, regulations, and policies provide

specific guidance about visitor use but leave some room for

judgment regarding the best mix of types and levels of visitor

use activities, programs, and facilities. The alternatives

presented and evaluated in this draft general management plan

represent several approaches to providing quality visitor

experiences within the given parameters.

In each alternative, the National Park Service will take the

following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy

requirements related to visitor experience and park use:

Provide a wide range of opportunities for visitors to

understand, appreciate, and enjoy park resources in ways

that leave them unimpaired for future generations.

Manage recreational uses to promote high quality visitor

experiences and avoid impacts on park resources and

values.

Ensure that all park programs and facilities are accessible

to the extent feasible.

Management of Cultural Resources

The National Park Service is steward of many of America’s

most important cultural resources. Cultural resources are

categorized as archeological resources, cultural landscapes,

ethnographic resources, historic and prehistoric structures,

and museum collections. Current service-wide laws and

policies require that the following cultural resource

management conditions be achieved at the park (Sources:

NPS Organic Act, National Historic Preservation Act, 2001

NPS Management Policies, DO-28: Cultural Resources

Management, and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for

the Treatment of Historic Properties).

The National Park Service will employ the most effective

concepts, techniques, and equipment to protect cultural

resources against theft, fire, vandalism, overuse,

deterioration, environmental impacts, and other threats

without compromising the integrity of the resources.

The National Park Service will provide for the long-term

preservation of, public access to, and appreciation of the

features, materials, and qualities contributing to the

significance of cultural resources.

The treatment of cultural landscapes will preserve

significant physical attributes, biotic systems, and uses

when those uses contribute to historical significance.

Treatment decisions and implementation procedures will

be based on sound preservation practices to enable longterm preservation of a resource’s historic features,

qualities, and materials.

Contemporary alterations and additions to a cultural

landscape must not change, obscure, or destroy its

significant spatial organization, materials, and features.

The National Park Service will collect, protect, preserve,

provide access to, and use objects specimens, and archival

and manuscript collections to aid understanding among

park visitors and to advance knowledge in the humanities

and sciences.

When historic furnishings are present in their original

arrangement in a historic structure, every effort will be

made to preserve them as an entity. They will not be

moved or replaced unless required for their protection or

repair, or unless the structure is designated for another

use in an approved planning document.

Archival and manuscript collections are museum

collections and will be preserved, arranged, catalogued,

and described in finding aids. They will be maintained

and used in ways that preserve the collections and their

context intact while providing controlled access. Archival

and manuscript collections will be available to researchers

unless specifically prohibited by law.

Notwithstanding the specific purposes for which the park

was established, park will be prepared to comply with the

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

 Special Mandates, Laws, and Policies 
C h a p t e r O n e  P u r p o s e a n d N e e d f o r A c t i o n

23

in event of inadvertent discovery of human remains in

course of any earth disturbing activities.

Planning Parameters: Laws, regulations, and policies provide

specific guidance about managing cultural resources. In each

alternative, the National Park Service will take the following

kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements related

to cultural resource management:

Provide for public access and appreciation of the park’s

cultural resources without compromising their historic

integrity or ability to be preserved unimpaired for future

generations.

Management of Natural Resources

The National Park Service strives to understand, maintain,

restore, and protect the inherent integrity of the natural

resources, processes, systems, and values of a park. Current

service-wide laws and policies require that the following

natural resource management conditions be achieved at the

park (Sources: NPS Organic Act, National Parks Omnibus

Management Act of 1998, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act,

Endangered Species Act, 2001 NPS Management Policies, DO77 Natural Resource Protection).

Natural resources will be maintained in an unimpaired

condition for the enjoyment of future generations.

Natural systems and the human influences upon them be

monitored to detect change and appropriate management

actions developed to preserve these resources for the

enjoyment of future generations.

Environmental costs and benefits of proposed operations,

development, and resource management will be fully and

openly evaluated before taking actions that may impact

natural resources.

Planning Parameters: Laws, regulations, and policies provide

specific guidance about managing natural resources. In each

alternative, the National Park Service will take the following

kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements related

to natural resource management:

The park’s natural resources will be actively managed to

maintain and preserve the fundamental physical and

biological processes, individual species, features, and

plant and animal communities the park ecosystem for the

enjoyment of future generations.

Visitor and Employee Safety

The NPS has a continuing concern about the health and safety

of its employees and others who spend time in the parks –

whether as visitors, volunteers, contractors, concession

employees, or in any other capacity. Those who participate in

work or recreational activities in the parks are always, to some

extent, exposed to the risk of accident, injury, or illness. In

recognizing this, the NPS is committed to reducing these risks

and the associated pain, suffering, and financial expense.

Current service-wide laws and policies require that the

following visitor and employee safety conditions be achieved

in the park (Source: NPS Organic Act, 2001 NPS Management

Policies, DO-83: Public Health, DO-50b: Occupational Safety

and Health).

While recognizing that there are limitations on its

capability to totally eliminate all hazards, the NPS and its

concessioners will seek to provide a safe and healthful

environment for visitors and employees

Acknowledging that all recreation activities pose a certain

degree of risk which the NPS cannot totally control,

visitors must assume a substantial degree of risk and

responsibility for their own safety when visiting areas that

are managed and maintained as natural, cultural, or

recreational environments.

Provide a safe and healthful place of employment, and

protect Federal and private property from accidental

damage or loss associated with NPS operations.

Protect the health and well-being of NPS employees and

park visitors through the elimination or control of disease

agents and the various means of their transmission to man

and to ensure compliance with applicable federal, state,

and local public health laws, regulations, and ordinances.

Implementation of this policy will be tempered by the

Organic Act’s requirement that the NPS conserve the

scenery and natural and historic objects and wildlife

therein in such a manner and by such a means that will

leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future

generations.

Planning Parameters: The National Park Service will take the

following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy

requirements related to visitor and employee safety at the park.

National Park Service will provide as safe and healthful

environment for visitors, contractors, and employees as

possible recognizing potential limitations given its overarching requirement to conserve the park’s cultural and

natural resources unimpaired.

National Park Service will provide as safe and healthful

environment for visitors, contractors, and employees as

possible recognizing potential limitations due to available

funding and staffing and the risks associated with certain

recreational activities.

Actions outside Carl Sandburg Home NHS

Ecological processes cross park boundaries, and park

boundaries may not incorporate all of the natural resources,

cultural sites, and scenic vistas that relate to park resources or

 Special Mandates, Laws, and Policies 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

24

the quality of visitor experience. Therefore, activities proposed

for adjacent lands may significantly affect park programs,

resources, and values. Conversely, NPS activities may have

impacts outside park boundaries. Current service-wide laws

and policies require that the following conditions related to

outside actions be achieved in the park (Source: NPS Organic

Act, 2001 NPS Management Policies).

Recognizing that parks are integral parts of larger regional

environments, NPS will work cooperatively with others to

anticipate, avoid, and resolve potential conflicts; protect

park resources and values; provide for visitor enjoyment;

and address mutual interests in the quality of life of

community residents, including matters such as economic

development and resource and environmental protection

Superintendents will be aware of and monitor land use

proposals and changes to adjacent lands and their

potential impacts. They will also seek to encourage

compatible adjacent land uses to avoid or to mitigate

potential adverse effects.

Planning Parameters: The National Park Service will take the

following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy

requirements related to relationships with non NPS agencies

or actions outside of the park.

Resources outside the park will be monitored and owners

or stewards of those resources encouraged to manage

them in such a way that park resources will be

safeguarded

NPS will work cooperatively with others to anticipate,

avoid, and resolve potential conflicts and address mutual

interests

Discussion of Planning Issues

Planning issues are derived from an examination of the full

range of comments and ideas solicited from park staff, other

agencies, special interest groups, and the general public during

scoping. An understanding of the park mission and important

planning issues helped the planning team develop potential

management alternatives that respond to current and future

resource and visitor experience conditions.

The following paragraphs summarize the full range of

planning issues identified during scoping. The range of issues

falls generally into two categories: A) Comments most

appropriately addressed by a GMP, and B) Comments most

appropriately addressed by other plans. Comments discussed

within these two broad categories are further subdivided into

groups according to the general topic they address. A short

discussion and recommendation follows each comment group

so the reader might derive additional insight into how

particular groups of comments were interpreted and used to

formulate the alternative management concepts.

Comments most appropriately addressed by

a GMP:

The following comments reflect thoughts and concerns about

the historic integrity of the site.

1. Site should remain as original and untouched as possible.

2. Site should look just like Sandburg left it - and reflect his

and his family’s unique personalities.

3. Historic nature of the landscape is very important to an

overall enjoyable visitor experience.

4. The park is an important connection point for local

people with their local history - its more important than a

community park to many local visitors.

5. Historic nature of the park should be preserved

Discussion: Public and staff response is overwhelmingly in

agreement about the need to protect the special Sandburg

ambiance of the site. There is, however, a relatively wide range

of opinion about the most appropriate methods to preserve

and enhance a visitor’s ability to connect with the historic

character of the site.

Planning Guidance: Management alternatives proposed in this

GMP must not include recommendations that compromise

the integrity of the historic scene. While it is understood that

the proposed alternatives may differ in their conceptual

approaches, each alternative must recognize and protect the

special historic ambiance of the site.

The following comments reflect thoughts and concerns about

recreational use of the park.

1. Recreation use is important to local residents.

2. Residents use park for recreational activities because they

feel safe there.

3. Greenway tie-in is important and should be incorporated

and supported.

4. Horse/bridal trails could be constructed at the park.

5. Park needs more picnic areas.

6. Would like to see a perimeter trail.

7. Would like to walk on a trail through the fields.

8. Recreation use is important use of the park and to some

it is more important than the Sandburg story.

9. County and local governments may rely too strongly on

park to provide recreation opportunity for local citizens.

10. Need more walking trails.

11. Need to construct more bird watching / nature trails.

12. Would like to see bike trails included at the park

Discussion: More people live near the park than ever before

and, consequently, a significant increase in recreational activity

has occurred. Not surprisingly, many comments about

 Planning Issues 
C h a p t e r O n e  P u r p o s e a n d N e e d f o r A c t i o n

25

improving or expanding opportunities for recreational use

were recorded during scoping.

There is concern by park staff and some members of the

general public that uncontrolled recreational use could

permanently change the historic character of park. In

addition, many park staff and volunteers feel their

commitment to the mission of the park would be

compromised by accommodating unlimited recreational

activity. While a historic precedent for walking and hiking

exists at the site, the impacts of some types of recreational

activity are seen as an intrusion on the historic scene by

visitors who come to the park for a Sandburg-related

experience.

Planning Guidance: Proposed management alternatives must

have a strategy to manage recreation use. Alternatives should

provide opportunities for walking and hiking to the extent that

such accommodations contribute to the overall mission of the

park and do not negatively impact the fundamental historic

integrity of the site. Recreational activities such as horse back

riding, bicycle riding, skate boarding, kite flying, sun bathing,

sledding, and cross country skiing represent some of the

recreational activities considered inappropriate in any

alternative because of their potentially negative impact to the

historic scene.

The following comments reflect thoughts and concerns about

parking facilities at the park:

1. Need more parking at park.

2. Need to add a parking lot.

3. Can park boundaries be expanded to accommodate

additional parking?

4. Is mass transit a possible solution for parking shortage?

5. Visitors don’t want to see cars from the house.

6. Visitors would like to drive up to the house or park closer

to the house.

7. Theatre and local businesses also need more parking -

parking problem is not just a park problem but rather a

community wide problem which will continue to worsen

over time.

Discussion: A chronic parking shortage exists at the park. The

situation is aggravated when cars parked by early arriving

visitors intent on a walking experience displace later arriving

visitors who wish to take the interpretive house tour. When the

parking lot is full, visitors often elect to park on the shoulder

of Little River Road which can be hazardous during periods of

high traffic volume.

A shared parking agreement has existed for over 20 years that

allows overflow parking in the nearby parking lot of the Flat

Rock Playhouse. That resource, however, has become less

available for visitor use because of an expanded performance

schedule at the Playhouse.

Planning Guidance: It is clear that too few parking spaces

exist to support parking demand for both local and out of

town visitors. The situation is sure to worsen as more visitors

come to the park. Proposed alternative management concepts

must explore possible solutions to help resolve the parking

shortage.

The following comments reflect thoughts and concerns about

increased access to information and artifacts associated with

the Sandburg story:

1. Need to add a visitors center with museum.

2. Need better facilities to show artifacts - need more

exhibit space.

3. Create a Carl Sandburg library or literature center. Create

a Carl Sandburg institute for continuing education and

study.

4. Can some of the historic structures be adapted for other

appropriate uses?

5. Are other sale locations possible within the park to

generate additional opportunities to sell Carl Sandburg

related literature and interpretive materials?

Discussion: Comments indicate a desire for greater access to

Sandburg related artifacts and manuscripts currently in

curatorial storage at the park. Comments also indicate a

common acknowledgment of the potential benefit to

interpretive and educational programs that greater access to

these resources would create. Additional points of sale for

Sandburg literature and related products are seen as beneficial

from the standpoint of increasing access to information about

artifacts and manuscripts in the museum collection. The

central question of this discussion seems to be determining an

appropriate way to provide access while continuing to protect

and preserve sensitive resources.

Planning Guidance: The planning team recognizes the

potential benefits of increasing access to information and

artifacts contained in the museum collection of the park and

the need for proper protection and preservation of those

resources. While specific program recommendations are

beyond the scope of this plan, potential concepts should

identify support elements that facilitate increased access to

museum artifacts and manuscripts. In particular, the suitability

and feasibility of increasing the number of interpretive and

educational venues should be thoughtfully considered.

The following comments reflect thoughts and concerns about

the location of the amphitheater:

1. Is the amphitheater located in the most appropriate

place?

2. Does the park really need an amphitheater?

 Planning Issues 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

26

3. Is the existing amphitheater located too close to the

House?

Discussion: While the existing amphitheater has been in use

for many years, the structure is officially classified as

temporary. There have been suggestions that the proximity of

the amphitheater to the main house disturbs the interpretive

experience during periods when particularly loud or active

programs are occurring.

Planning Guidance: The amphitheater plays an important role

in implementing the park’s interpretive program and should

not be eliminated. Proposed alternative concepts should

explore the possibility of finding a more suitable and feasible

location for the facility.

The following comments reflect thoughts and concerns about

visitor service facilities at the park:

1. Access to bathrooms are a particular problem for visitors.

2. Need to add a restaurant or food service opportunity at

park.

Discussion: While the existing trailer comfort station near the

main house has been in its current location for many years, it

is still officially classified as a temporary structure. There is a

need to upgrade the facility to better meet the personal needs

of visitors. In addition, several comments about the possibility

of making some form of refreshment available at the park were

voiced during scoping.

Planning Guidance: The need to improve the existing comfort

station is clear. The addition of bathroom facilities to historic

structures is problematic due to the particularly invasive nature

of this type of renovation.

A restaurant or other food service opportunity was considered

inappropriate for inclusion in any alternative because of its

potential impact on the historic scene and a desire to avoid

duplication of visitor services that can be more efficiently

provided by private businesses in the local community.

The following comments reflect thoughts and concerns about

resource conditions, maintenance, and security of park

facilities:

1. More visitors will have significant impact on condition of

grounds and historic resources - there will be more wear

and tear on them.

2. Entrance points are uncontrolled - could be a security

and maintenance problem.

3. Day use designation as described in old Master Plan may

be out of date - people use the park in evening.

4. Can the expected increase in visitation be translated into

additional opportunities to more effectively preserve,

manage, make accessible park resources.

Discussion: Promoting the Sandburg story to more visitors

increases opportunities to strengthen public and private

support for the park which could be translated into additional

financial resources to preserve, manage, and make them

accessible. The management challenge of increased visitation

is limiting the exposure of significant cultural and natural

resources to overuse in ways that do not undercut support for

the park or inhibit its ability to accomplish interpretive and

educational goals.

Planning Guidance: Sensitive park resources must not be

impaired. Proposed alternative actions will protect park

resources and seek to maximize any potential benefits

increased interest in park resources may have on its ability to

protect and manage them.

The following comments reflect thoughts and concerns about

the importance of the park to local and regional economies:

1. Plan should promote parks standing as a tourist

destination and important economic contributor to the

local economy.

2. Marketing and visitor management important to success

of park and local economy. There is a symbiotic

relationship between local businesses and park.

3. Increasing length of time visitors stay at park - increasing

the average length of visit may help the local economy by

enticing people to spend the night in the local area and

see additional Flat Rock and Hendersonville attractions

Discussion: The park is a significant contributor to the local

economy as a tourism destination and relies on its good

relationship with local businesses to provide visitor services

like food and lodging. Important partnering opportunities

exist to achieve common goals and objectives.

Planning Guidance: Proposed management alternatives should

support a continued good relationship with local businesses

and promote additional partnership opportunities. GMP

should not recommend providing visitor services that can be

more efficiently delivered by businesses in the local economy.

The following comments reflect thoughts and concerns about

local community development issues:

1. Surrounding community will continue to develop a more

suburban/urban character over the next 20 years.

2. Visual connection between park and community is

important.

3. Views of adjacent homes need to be screened from park.

4. Can park boundaries be expanded to accommodate

donations of open space?

5. Any future developments outside the currently

authorized boundary of the park should be sensitive to

the historic character of the Village of Flat Rock.

 Planning Issues 
C h a p t e r O n e  P u r p o s e a n d N e e d f o r A c t i o n

27

6. Demographics of community will remain predominantly

wealthy and retired.

7. Availability of open space will continue to be a

community issue over the next 15 years.

8. Population growth expected to continue at 5% per year

over the next 20 years.

Discussion: The surrounding area has become a popular

retirement community and continues to grow at a steady rate.

This growth has affected the character of the surrounding

community and caused it to become more suburban in nature.

Planning Guidance: Proposed alternative actions should

acknowledge and compliment the goals of local government

and citizens to maintain an appropriate level of community

development.

The following comments reflect thoughts and concerns about

sharing the Sandburg story with people beyond the boundaries

of the park:

1. Sandburg story is a draw for intellectual and academic

based activities.

2. Sandburg literature is going out of print - low sales of

books and less interest in Carl Sandburg on a national

level are contributing factors. Would increased access

and exposure to the Sandburg story help this situation?

3. Can Sandburg story be told effectively outside the

boundaries of the park? Is the park the most suitable

vehicle to tell that story or should this be a project for

another organization? Are outreach programs a

possibility?

Discussion: There was significant input during scoping from

people who identified a broad range of opportunities to tell

the Sandburg story beyond the boundaries of the park.

Planning Guidance: Alternative management strategies should

explore possibilities that allow the Sandburg story to be told to

a broader audience. The scope of these concepts should range

from conservative to visionary in order to better gauge the

advantages and disadvantages of various courses of action.

Comments more appropriately addressed by

other plans:

Certain comments and concerns received during scoping

relate to issues more appropriately addressed in other

planning or implementation documents. Those comments are

referenced to the plan in which they would most likely be

addressed in the following paragraphs.

The following comments would be more appropriately

addressed in a Comprehensive Interpretive Plan.

1. Tour group sizes should not exceed 15 people per group.

2. Don’t use audio tours to replace live interpreters.

3. Music is an important interpretive tool. Would like to see

more music-oriented programs.

4. Need more 4H/agricultural activities and programs.

5. Event programming is important to keep local population

involved with the park over a long period of time. Need

lots of special programs and events to keep people

interested and involved.

6. Tours describing historical landscape features might be

popular.

7. Tell the whole story of the site - the Memminger and

Smyth stories are important too.

8. Oral histories should be recorded and made available for

use by public.

9. More poetry readings at amphitheater.

10. More programs on Carl Sandburg as a social activist.

11. More children’s programs - more educational programs

in general for children.

12. More advanced notice of special events would be nice.

13. Coordinated programs with Carl Sandburg birthplace in

Galesburg might be successful.

14. Community concerts and other activities at night might

be incorporated into park program.

15. Tell more of the Mrs. Sandburg story.

16. More education programs are desired.

17. Multigenerational contact is important for young and old

visitors - an important part of the visitor experience that

is sometimes overlooked.

18. Park is viewed by some as being exclusive - less wealthy

and younger people may feel out of place due to the

intensity of use by local residents who are predominantly

wealthy and retired.

19. The goat herd should be expanded.

20. Label the trees and flowers with their botanical and

common names

21. Need more brochures on park and its programs

Discussion: The number of comments received about this

topic indicate there is much interest and support for the

interpretive programming efforts of the park. While specific

program recommendations are beyond the scope of this plan,

proposed management concepts should be mindful of the

great value visitors and staff place on interpretive and

educational programs and look for opportunities to support

and promote those efforts.

The following comment would be more appropriately

addressed in a Cultural Landscape Report.

1. Gardens need to be restored.

2. Keep the standard for maintenance of the grounds high.

3. Poison Ivy is a real problem at the park.

 Planning Issues 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

28

Discussion: Specific recommendations about the priority of or

design of historic gardens or landscape maintenance

techniques are not addressed in a GMP. Some general

guidance may be provided regarding this issue in prescriptive

management zone descriptions.

The following comments would be more appropriately

addressed in a Resource Management Plan.

1. Milk the goats and sell the milk.

2. No dogs allowed at park.

3. Dogs scare some visitors and their droppings are a health

and maintenance concern.

Discussion: Not addressed directly in GMP. Some guidance

could be provided in zone descriptions but specific

recommendations regarding these comments are not made in

a GMP. The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR 2.15)

provides specific regulations regarding the presence of pets in

national parks.

The following comments would be more appropriately

addressed in a Volunteer Management Plan.

1. Friends group needs support to get more volunteers.

2. Friends and volunteers are critically important to success

of park.

3. Can a trust or other mechanism be developed to help

keep Carl Sandburg works in print?

Discussion: Not addressed directly in GMP.

The following comments would be more appropriately

addressed during a facility or landscape design study.

1. Amphitheater is too hot on a sunny day.

2. More trail side benches.

Discussion: Not addressed directly in GMP. Some general

guidance may be provided regarding this issue in prescriptive

management zone descriptions.

 Major Decision Points 

Major Decision Points

The following five decision points were developed by studying

and analyzing the list of GMP-related planning issues

identified during the scoping process. Major decision points

generally reflect areas where people’s visions about the future

management of the park are substantially different and

represent types of questions that could potentially be

answered differently by different stakeholders, depending on

their point of view.

1. To what degree should the need or demand for recreation

activity be accommodated at the park?

2. Can visitor use be adequately controlled with multiple

access points?

3. To what degree can/should the park rely on Public/

Private partnerships to procure the necessary resources

to manage the park?

4. Can the park continue to provide quality visitor services

and protect cultural and natural resources of the park

within the existing boundary of the park? Is a boundary

expansion needed, and if so, how much and for what

purpose?

5. How extensive a role should the park play in interpreting

the Sandburg legacy to people beyond the boundary of

the park?

The alternatives presented later in this document express

different management approaches that attempt to answer

these questions.
C h a p t e r O n e  P u r p o s e a n d N e e d f o r A c t i o n

29

 Major Decision Points 

C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

31

CHAPTER TWO

Chapter Overview

Three alternative concepts and a “no-action” alternative are

presented. Each defines a different approach to determining

the most appropriate range of resource conditions and visitor

experiences that should be provided at the park. The three

alternatives are titled:

Sandburg Center alternative

Paths of Discovery alternative

Connemara Lifestyle alternative

The Sandburg Center alternative is the proposed action, the

NPS preferred alternative, and the environmentally preferred

alternative.

Five prescriptive management zones (PMZs) are described

prior to the discussion of alternatives. PMZs are used in

different combinations and locations to represent the

particular intent or focus of each alternative.

A comparison highlights the fundamental differences between

each alternative at the end of the chapter.

Prescriptive Management Zones

Prescriptive management zones influence the management of

park resources by specifying the desired visitor experiences,

desired cultural and natural resource conditions, and

appropriate kinds of activities and facilities necessary to

achieve those goals in designated areas of the park over time.

PMZs are developed by the planning team with the assistance

of other NPS personnel and input from the general public. The

formulation of PMZs is based in large part on the cultural and

natural resource management priorities of the park and a

desire to maintain a diversity of high quality visitor

experiences. While the definition of PMZs remains the same

in all alternatives, each overlays them in different

combinations and locations to best represent its own

particular intent or focus.

Five PMZs were developed for use in this GMP:

1. Historic Discovery Zone

2. Historic Interaction Zone

3. Visitor Services Zone

4. Park Services Zone

5. Amphitheater Relocation Zone

Recreational Carrying Capacity

This plan establishes qualitative carrying capacity guidelines by

describing future desired visitor experiences, desired resource

conditions, and appropriate kinds of activities and facilities for

each PMZ. These qualitative guidelines do not impose

quantitative visitor limits or use restrictions but function,

rather, as signals to alert park management and the public that

other actions may be necessary to sustain the particular

resource protection and visitor experience goals described in

the zone. Specific management responses to these signals

would vary according to the nature and intensity of the

problem.

To help park managers and the public recognize when

qualitative carrying capacities are being exceeded, a list of

suggested indicators of unacceptable impacts to resources and

visitor experience are given for each PMZ. The listed

indicators are not intended to be all inclusive and it should be

understood by the reader that additional indicators could be

added over time as improved scientific data and assessments

are developed.

The importance of establishing quantitative carrying capacity

specifications that reflect the most current scientific

methodologies, monitoring techniques, and implementation

strategies available is acknowledged by the plan. The plan also

recognizes that successful carrying capacity management often

requires quick response to new information, science, and

evolving circumstances (Haas 2001). For these reasons,

establishing detailed quantitative standards or monitoring

procedures to govern recreational carrying capacity

ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE

PROPOSED ACTION
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

32

management in each PMZ is considered beyond the scope of

this document.

The GMP does, however, support the establishment of

quantitative standards and recommends they be defined in

more flexible and adaptive planning and implementation

documents such as a Cultural Landscape Plan, Resource

Management Plan, Comprehensive Interpretive Plan, Trail

Management Plan, or similar plan. Carrying capacity standards

in subsequent documents would be developed with the

appropriate level of environmental impact analysis as directed

by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and NPS

policy.

Description of Historic Discovery Zone

Desired Visitor Experiences

Visitors to the historic discovery zone would experience a

historic scene very similar to what the Sandburgs knew. People

may explore cultural and natural resources by foot and

discover interesting elements of the Sandburg story as they

move through the zone at their own pace.

Interaction between visitors and park resources would be

informal. The introduction of visible non-period-ofsignificance elements in the landscape would be minimized.

Historic structures would be preserved, furnished as

appropriate, and incorporated into the interpretive program.

Interpretation would be provided in ways that maintain and

enhance the historic ambiance of the zone.

Opportunities for solitude or a contemplative experience

would be possible at times. The probability of encountering

other visitors would be low except during seasonal periods of

moderate to high visitation. Visitors would rarely encounter

park staff or see evidence of NPS management. Visitors could

expect to be more than a 30 minute walk from the nearest

water fountain or comfort station in certain areas of this zone.

Visiting some areas in this zone would require a moderate to

high level of physical exertion.

Desired Resource Conditions or Character

Cultural and natural resources would be maintained and

preserved to closely reflect the historic character of the

Sandburg residency. Only modifications to cultural and natural

resources necessary to ensure visitor safety or prevent resource

degradation would be implemented.

New trails would not be constructed without historical

evidence of their existence during the period of significance.

Trails, if present, would be maintained to reflect historic

conditions during the Sandburg residency except where

necessary to provide emergency and maintenance vehicle

access. All trails would be naturally surfaced and visually

harmonious with the surrounding landscape. The presence of

NPS interpretive waysides and trail-side site amenities like

benches, trash receptacles, and water fountains would not be

found in this zone.

Appropriate Kinds of Activities or Facilities

The introduction of visible non-period of significance

elements in the landscape is minimized. Interpretation is

provided by means other than wayside exhibits.

Walking, hiking, and viewing cultural and natural resources

would be the primary activities. Trail use would be limited to

foot traffic except for occasional park maintenance activities

and emergency vehicle use.

Historic structures, when present, would be preserved to

period of significance, their interiors historically furnished

where feasible, and incorporated into the interpretive program.

Indicators of unacceptable impacts to resources and visitor

experiences

The following indicators are signals to park management and

the public that other management actions may be necessary to

sustain the resources and visitor experiences described in the

PMZ.

The volume and frequency of maintenance activity

necessary to keep walking trails, if present, safe and

historically accurate compromises the visitors’ ability to

experience a zone relatively free from non-historic

intrusions.

Perceived crowding becomes high enough to compromise

the contemplative nature of the woodland walking

experience for a majority of visitors in the zone.

Soil erosion along walking trails cannot be controlled

without hardening the trail surface or installation of

erosion control devices that would compromise the

historic character of the trail.

The volume and frequency of recreational activity in the

zone has a direct and significant negative impact on the

visitor experience or resource protection objectives of an

adjacent zone.

Description of Historic Interaction Zone

Desired Visitor Experiences

The zone would promote interpretive experiences that help

visitors learn about the importance of Carl Sandburg’s life and

works. Intimate contact with cultural and natural resources

would be possible. Interpretive experiences would be selfguided or led by a ranger or trained volunteer.

The sights and sounds of people actively engaged in

interpretive programs would be evident during periods of

 Prescriptive Management Zones 
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

33

Historic 

Discovery 

Zone

Historic 

Interaction 

Zone

Visitor 

Services 

Zone

Park 

Services 

Zone

Amphitheater 

Relocation 

Zone

Desired 

historic 

character or 

setting

Historic character 

represents period of 

significance as 

accurately as possible. 

Only very minor 

changes to the historic 

scene necessary to 

insure basic visitor 

safety and resource 

protection may occur. 

Non-contributing 

elements are common 

in this zone. Extreme 

care is taken to insure 

that structures and 

activities in this zone 

do not adversely 

impact the historic 

character or visitor 

experience in other 

zones.

Predominantly 

accurate to period of 

significance. Some 

non-contributing 

additions to facilitate 

interpretation of the 

Sandburg story and 

visitor education may 

be present.

The general historic 

character or theme of 

the park is maintained 

in this zone. Noncontributing elements 

are apparent but such 

additions are carefully 

designed and placed 

to compliment the 

historic character of 

adjacent zones. 

The general historic 

character or theme of 

the park is maintained 

in this zone. Noncontributing elements 

are apparent but such 

additions are carefully 

designed and placed 

to compliment the 

historic character of 

adjacent zones. 

Desired visitor 

experience 

Visitors may 

experience a historic 

scene very similar to 

what Carl Sandburg 

might have known. 

Opportunities for 

solitude and 

contemplation exist at 

most times.

Visitors do not 

typically enter this 

zone.

Intimate contact with 

cultural and natural 

resources allow 

visitors to learn more 

about the life of Carl 

Sandburg, his work, 

and family.

The sights and sounds 

of other visitors and 

staff would be 

common. 

Visitors are welcomed 

to the site and 

opportunities for 

orientation, 

interpretation, and 

education exist.

Visitors can 

participate in a wide 

variety of 

interpretive and 

educational 

programs.

Potential 

facilities found 

in zone

Predominantly 

historic trails with 

historic structures 

preserved or restored 

to period of 

significance.

Predominantly 

administrative offices, 

curatorial facilities, 

maintenance facilities, 

storage buildings, and 

service areas.

Stage, seating, and 

associated walkways 

or trails necessary for 

amphitheater use.

Predominantly historic 

landscape and 

architecture. Some 

architectural interiors 

possibly rehabilitated 

for interpretation, 

education, or 

administrative uses.

Facilities may include 

any of the following 

elements: parking lot, 

non-historic trails, 

visitor center, contact 

station, comfort 

station, information 

kiosks, and similar 

elements that provide 

interpretation, 

education, or 

orientation services to 

visitors.

Zone_highlights_P1.eps

Potential visitor 

education and 

interpretation 

opportunities 

in zone 

Primarily a selfguided interpretive 

experience. 

Resources in this area 

are generally not 

available for use by 

visitors without prior 

arrangement with park 

managers.

Opportunities center 

around scheduled 

programs and 

performances.

Visitors are able to 

participate in a wide 

variety of self-guided, 

interactive, and ranger 

led experiences. 

available to visitors

Opportunities for 

educational and 

interpretive 

experiences exist but 

availabilities 

dependent on the 

types of facilities 

present. 

Character of 

potential trails 

and trail 

associated 

amenities 

present in zone

Only trails and trail 

amenities that existed 

during the period of 

significance are 

present with the 

exception of 

directional and safety 

related signage. Trail 

appearance reflects 

historic conditions.

Only trails that existed 

during the period of 

significance are 

present and their 

appearance reflects 

historic conditions. 

Amenities such as 

benches and trash 

receptacles may be 

present but are used 

sparingly to protect 

the historic scene. 

Trails and trail 

amenities are not 

present in this zone.

Trails serve only to 

connect the 

amphitheater facility 

to the main 

circulation system of 

the park. 

Trails may be paved 

or naturally surfaced. 

Amenities are not 

present. 

New trails may be 

present. Trail 

amenities may be 

placed for the 

convenient use of 

visitors. Trails may be 

paved or naturally 

surfaced. 

Frequency and 

visibility of 

interpretive 

waysides 

found in zone 

Interpretive waysides 

are not present in this 

zone.

Interaction or 

encounter rate 

with NPS 

personnel or 

other visitors 

Visitors will have 

occasional contact with 

other visitors but 

periods of solitude are 

possible during times 

of low to moderate 

visitation. A low 

encounter rate with 

NPS personnel is 

expected at most 

times.

Visitors can expect 

a moderate to 

high encounter 

rate with NPS personnel and other 

visitors in this 

zone.

Visitors can expect a 

high encounter rate 

with NPS personnel and 

other visitors in this 

zone.

Visitors can expect a 

high encounter rate 

with other people and 

NPS personnel when 

programed events occur. 

Visitors typically enter 

this zone on official 

business only.

Interpretive waysides 

are not present in this 

zone.

Interpretive waysides 

may be present but are 

placed sensitively to 

protect the historic 

scene in this and 

nearby zones. 

Interpretive waysides 

may be present but 

are placed sensitively 

to protect the historic 

scene in this and 

nearby zones. 

Interpretive waysides 

are present and in plain 

view. Frequency and 

location are sensitive to 

historic scene in nearby 

zones. 

Figure 2-a. Prescriptive Management Zone Highlights

 Prescriptive Management Zones 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

34

moderate to high visitation. The probability of encountering

other visitors would be high at most times. The probability of

encountering park staff and other evidence of NPS

management would be high at most times. Visiting most areas

in this zone would require a low to moderate level of physical

exertion. Interpretive programs would be provided in ways

that respect and maintain the historic ambiance of the zone.

Desired Resource Conditions or Character

The historic landscape would be managed to represent the

period of the Sandburg residency. The presence of

appropriately sited interpretive waysides and trail-side site

amenities like benches and trash receptacles would be evident.

The exteriors of architectural resources are preserved or

restored to the period of significance. Interiors of historic

architectural resources (or portions thereof) may be

preserved, restored and furnished, or rehabilitated to support

interpretation or operational goals as described in the specific

alternative management concept being considered.

Appropriate Kinds of Activities or Facilities

Primary activities include viewing cultural and natural

resources and participating in interpretive programs.

Historic landscape and historic structure exteriors will remain

accurate to the period of significance. Interiors of historic

buildings may be preserved, restored and furnished, or

rehabilitated to support the management goals of the specific

concept.

Indicators of unacceptable impacts to resources and visitor

experiences

The following indicators are signals to park management and

the public that other management actions may be necessary to

sustain the resources and visitor experiences described in the

PMZ.

The volume and frequency of program activity and

interpretive displays in the zone compromise a significant

number of visitors’ ability to imagine what the site was like

during the period of significance.

The volume and frequency of program activity in the zone

has a direct and significant negative impact on the visitor

experience or resource protection objectives of an

adjacent zone or on a park neighbor.

Visitor satisfaction falls below acceptable levels for the

quality and diversity of interpretive programs.

Perceived crowding becomes high enough to compromise

the visitor experience for a majority of visitors.

The volume and frequency of program activities in the

zone cause or threaten to cause significant physical

damage to cultural or natural resources.

Description of Amphitheater Relocation

Zone

Desired Visitor Experiences

Visitors come to this zone to experience and participate in

Sandburg related interpretive programs and performances.

Frequent contact with other visitors and NPS personnel is

expected in this zone.

Desired Resource Conditions or Character

Resources can be modified to accommodate the needs of the

visitor. Non-historic additions to the landscape are expected

but their designs are sensitive and complimentary to the

historical context of the areas in which they occur. Minimizing

visual and sound impacts to adjacent zones is very important.

Visitor facilities and services are intensively managed for

resource protection and visitor safety in this zone.

Appropriate Kinds of Activities or Facilities

The amphitheater would support park interpretive programs

such as theater and musical performances, lectures, and poetry

readings. Amplified sound could be incorporated into

programs and events. Walking trails are created only for the

purpose of connecting the amphitheater facility to the main

pedestrian system of the park.

Indicators of unacceptable impacts to resources and visitor

experiences

The following indicators are signals to park management and

the public that other management actions are necessary to

sustain the resources and visitor experiences described in the

PMZ.

The volume and frequency of program activity in the zone

has a direct and significant negative impact on the visitor

experience or resource protection objectives of an

adjacent zone.

Visitor satisfaction falls below acceptable levels for

perceived comfort, safety, quality of construction and

materials, and ability to accommodate a wide range of

programs and performances.

Description of Visitor Services Zone

Desired Visitor Experiences

The visitor services zone is a transition area that visitors pass

through immediately before and after their park experience. It

 Prescriptive Management Zones 
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

35

allows visitors time to prepare emotionally and intellectually

before entering the park and provides an opportunity for

personal reflection and the asking of last minute questions

before they leave.

The probability of encountering other visitors, park staff, and

evidence of NPS management would be high in this zone.

Desired Resource Conditions or Character

Cultural and natural resources can be modified to

accommodate the needs of the visitor. Non-historic additions

to the landscape are expected but their designs are sensitive

and complimentary to the historical context of the areas in

which they occur. Minimizing visual and sound impacts to

adjacent zones is very important. Visitor facilities, services,

and activities are intensively managed for resource protection

and visitor safety in this zone.

Appropriate Kinds of Activities or Facilities

Visitors enter and leave the park only through a visitor services

zone. Visitors exit their vehicles, are welcomed to the site, and

receive introductory information about programs and facilities

in this zone. Orientation and interpretation opportunities are

provided through a variety of venues and formats.

Visitor support facilities such as contact stations, museum

exhibitions, interpretive media, parking areas, comfort

stations, benches, water fountains, sidewalks, and walking

trails are representative of types of facilities appropriate in this

zone.

Indicators of unacceptable impacts to resources and visitor

experiences

The following indicators are signals to park management and

the public that other management actions may be necessary to

sustain the resources and visitor experiences described in the

PMZ.

The volume and frequency of recreation activity in the

zone has a direct and significant negative impact on the

visitor experience or resource protection objectives of an

adjacent zone or park neighbor.

Perceived crowding in the visitors parking area becomes

high enough to discourage a significant number of visitors

from entering the park.

Proposed infrastructure in the zone would have a direct

and significant negative impact on the visitor experience

or resource protection objectives of the zone, an adjacent

zone, or a park neighbor.

The number of incidents requiring intervention by law

enforcement personnel increases to an unacceptable level.

The number of traffic accidents on Little River Road or in

the Visitors Parking Area increases to an unacceptable

level.

A significant decline in air or water quality in the zone

occurs.

A significant number of visitors enter the park without

proper introduction to its purpose and national

significance.

Description of Park Services Zone

Desired Visitor Experiences

Visitors do not routinely enter this zone. The presence of NPS

maintenance activity and its associated noises and smells

would be apparent. Higher traffic densities could be expected.

Desired Resource Conditions or Character

Resources can be modified for park operational needs and

non-historic additions to the landscape are expected. Facilities

are intensely managed for safety purposes. Visual impacts of

park operational activities on the surrounding cultural

landscape would be reduced by screening or other appropriate

methods.

Appropriate Kinds of Activities or Facilities

All activities associated with park administration, museum

preservation center, and maintenance operations would be

appropriate in this zone so long as their impacts did not

adversely affect the visitor experience in adjacent zones.

Indicators of unacceptable impacts to resources and visitor

experiences

The following indicators are signals to park management and

the public that other management actions may be necessary to

sustain the resources and visitor experiences described in the

PMZ.

The sight, sound, and or smell of maintenance activity in

the zone has a direct and significant negative impact on

the visitor experience or resource protection objectives of

an adjacent zone or park neighbor.

 Prescriptive Management Zones 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

36

Actions Common to All Alternatives

Some proposed actions are common to all alternatives.

Environmental impacts associated with common actions are

discussed in Chapter IV, Environmental Consequences.

Legislative boundary expansion

Law and Policy

NPS Management Policies on land protection (NPS 2001, § 3.5)

require that relevant land planning processes identify and

evaluate boundary adjustments that may be necessary or

desirable in order to carry out the purposes of the park.

The NPS acquires lands or interests in land within park

boundaries when authorized to do so by an act of Congress or

Presidential proclamation. Acquisition of land outside

authorized park boundaries is generally prohibited with some

limited exceptions for minor boundary changes and the

acceptance of donated lands adjacent to a park’s boundary.

Once established, the boundary of a national park may be

modified only as authorized by law. For many parks, such

statutory authority is included in the enabling legislation or

subsequent legislation specifically authorizing a boundary

revision.

Authorized Boundary of Carl Sandburg Home NHS

The park’s enabling legislation authorized the purchase of 248

acres. Subsequent legislation (National Parks and Recreation

Act of 1978) authorized a boundary expansion to accept 16

acres of land donated by the North Carolina Nature

Conservancy. The authorized boundary of the park contains

only these lands. Therefore, in accordance with law and policy

and absent additional legislative authority to enlarge its

existing boundary, the park is prohibited from acquiring

interest in additional lands.

BoundaryAdjustment Criteria

The criteria used to evaluate proposed boundary adjustments

is set forth by Congress [16 USC 4601-9(c)(2)] and NPS policy

(NPS 2001, § 3.5)

Lands potentially included in a boundary adjustment proposal

may be recommended for one or more of the following

reasons:

Protect significant resources and values, or to enhance

opportunities for public enjoyment related to park

purposes, or

Address operational and management issues, such as the

need for access or the need for boundaries to correspond

to logical boundary delineations or topographic or other

natural features or roads

In addition, if lands within the adjusted boundary are to be

acquired using federally appropriated funds, the following

criteria must be met:

The added lands will be feasible to administer, considering

their size, configuration, and ownership

Hazardous substances are not present or can be removed

prior to acquisition

Costs are feasible considering current and potential future

park and service-wide financial obligations and priorities.

The views and impacts on local communities and

surrounding jurisdictions are considered

Natural resources on added lands will be feasible to

manage with regards to exotic species and other existing

or potential environmental issues

Other alternatives for management and resource

protection are not adequate

Discussion of boundary expansion criteria and proposed

boundary adjustments

While each alternative proposes slightly different boundary

configurations, the overall rationale for expansion is similar.

The following paragraphs address those criteria specified by

law and policy that must be considered in a boundary

expansion proposal. The reader should note that the no-action

alternative does not propose a boundary expansion and is not

included in this discussion.

Criterion: Protection of significant resources and values and

enhancement of opportunities for public enjoyment related to

park purposes:

Most of the park has relatively steep topography with slopes

sometimes exceeding 65 percent. Only 60 of its 264 total acres

contain slopes of less than 10 percent. Of these, approximately

25 acres slope between 5 to 10 percent, 8.5 acres are in ponds;

6 acres in roads, parking, or structures; and 20 acres are in

level pasture, gardens, or orchard. Because of their grass

dominated vegetation, association with historic structures, and

close proximity to visitor service facilities and public roads,

pasture areas are among the most visible in the park landscape.

Scoping comments indicate stakeholders place a very high

value on historic ambiance. Subjective observations by park

staff and the planning team suggest visitors closely associate

historic ambiance with the site’s pastoral landscape. Historic

ambiance is negatively affected by the presence of

contemporary objects both outside and inside park

boundaries. While it is recognized that the park cannot remain

completely insulated from modern influences, each non

 Actions Common to All Alternatives 
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

37

period of significance object added to the historic

environment is presumed to reduce historic ambiance and

visitor enjoyment to some degree.

Visitors enjoy panoramic views of the historic landscape from

two perspectives: looking south from Little River Road over

open pasture to the barn and main house area and looking

north from clearings along front and back drives over the same

pastures towards a wooded residential area. Both perspectives

share two fundamental attributes: a dominating midground

view of rolling open pasture and a predominantly wooded

background containing few contemporary structures. Non

historic influences on these panoramic viewsheds are

predominantly visual. Minimizing the presence of non historic

objects in pasture midgrounds and woodland backgrounds is

integral to preserving historic ambiance.

Several persons identified the relatively flat slope, easy access

to public roads, and lack of trees in the side pasture as

favorable conditions for constructing additional parking areas

or a visitor center. Indeed, the NPS 1971 master plan and 1977

development concept plan also considered, and ultimately

rejected because of potential negative impacts to cultural

resources, alternatives that proposed contemporary

developments in these areas. To be sure the same values that

existed in 1971 and 1977 were still at risk in 2002, the planning

team reexamined the issue of new construction in the side

pasture.

Carl Sandburg Home NHS is listed on the National Register of

Historic Places. Section 106 of the National Historic

Preservation Act directs managers of National Register

properties to avoid adverse affects to critical resources, of

which the pasture is identified as an important cultural

landscape feature. Like the previous studies, the planning

team determined that development in the side pasture would

have significant negative impact on the historic integrity of the

site.

As previously noted, placing contemporary structures in

pastures would have significant negative impacts on scenic

views that visitors highly value. In addition, construction in

these areas would cause significant removal of historic

vegetation, require substantial grading to provide safe

sightlines for vehicles entering and exiting Little River Road,

complicate an already problematic traffic pattern, and run

contrary to a community wide concern about pedestrian

safety.

Acknowledging its preservation responsibilities under Section

106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its concerns

about the safety of drivers and pedestrians on Little River

Road, the construction of visitor service facilities in the side

pasture was eliminated from further consideration as a viable

option in any alternative.

The steeper terrain in the remainder of the park makes those

areas unsuitable for development especially since access would

be limited to existing one-lane historic roads. Widening of the

historic roads to allow two-way traffic would significantly

change the historic character of the site and damage a historic

landscape element identified as a contributing feature to it’s

national register nomination. Given steep conditions and a

desire to protect the overall historic character the park for the

enjoyment of future generations, the planning team felt the

only viable option for creating needed parking or visitor center

facilities was to look outside of the park’s authorized

boundary.

Addresses operational and management issues, such as the need

for access or the need for boundaries to correspond to logical

boundary delineations or topographic or other natural features

or roads:

Big Glassy overlook is the highest point in the park and the

next most visited destination after the main house and barn

area. Carl Sandburg and his family often visited this granite

outcrop to enjoy its stunning views of surrounding mountains

and valleys. The majority of the overlook is within the

authorized park boundary. However, approximately 20 percent

of the outcrop, including the overlook precipice, lies outside

the authorized boundary on private property. While the park

enjoys a cooperative relationship with its Big Glassy neighbors,

it has an immediate interest in securing the remainder of the

overlook and immediately adjacent property so the viewing

area can be more effectively managed and potential safety and

liability issues addressed. The park would also like to acquire

by easement or purchase interest in up to 110 acres

immediately below the Big Glassy overlook to minimize sight

and sound intrusions from potential residential developments,

preserve large trees whose canopies form the vegetated slope

immediately beneath the overlook, and protect the wooded

background of the side pastures and viewpoints along Little

River Road and Back Drive.

The Conservation Trust of North Carolina has acknowledged

the potential impacts of modern development on historic

views adjacent to back drive by purchasing 22 of the 110 acres

described. The Trust has indicated that the property cannot be

held for NPS indefinitely.

A guided tour of the main house forms the core of the

interpretive experience. Unfortunately, hundreds of Carl

Sandburg’s personal possessions cannot be exhibited in the

main house due to their value (examples: medals and jewelry),

sensitivity to climatic conditions (examples: clothing and

photographs), or impracticality for display (examples: contents

of drawers and cupboards). These objects are currently cared

for in the museum preservation center. The availability of

 Actions Common to All Alternatives 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

38

additional climate controlled exhibit space would allow

visitors greater access to many of these objects. The Sandburg

Center and Paths of Discovery alternatives include provisions

for a visitor center that would add appropriate exhibit areas.

As discussed previously, suitable locations for such a facility do

not exist within the current boundary of the park. For these

alternatives, the park desires to acquire approximately 3 to 5

acres outside of the authorized boundary on which to

construct a visitor center and parking area.

There is growing community concern about vehicle and

pedestrian safety on Little River Road. When the existing

visitor parking area is full, vehicles often circulate in and out

searching for an open space or park on the shoulder of Little

River Road. The combination of on-street parking,

pedestrians, and through traffic is a safety risk. A communitywide parking shortage complicates the situation. The park can

address the traffic safety issue in two ways: control access to

the existing parking lot or increase parking capacity. The park

considers the controlled access option least desirable because

it potentially discourages people from visiting the park and

aggravates the community-wide parking shortage by diverting

vehicles onto road shoulders or into local neighborhoods.

Increased parking capacity is the park’s preferred course of

action. All alternatives include provisions to increase parking

capacity. However, as discussed previously, there is limited

opportunity to construct new parking areas within the existing

boundary of the park. In the Connemara lifestyle alternative,

the park would acquire approximately 1 to 2 acres near the

existing parking area to construct a 60 vehicle parking area. In

the Sandburg Center and Paths of Discovery alternatives, space

for a 60 vehicle parking area is incorporated into the 3 to 5

acres desired for a visitor center.

Some GMP scoping comments suggest additional parking

could be located on property in the proposed 25 to 110 acre

boundary expansion below Big Glassy. The park does not

support use of these areas for parking for the following

reasons. Welcoming visitors at the front entrance of

Connemara emphasizes the site’s historic significance and

allows visitor service and orientation facilities to be

consolidated in one convenient location. Multiple entrances

are not preferred because they complicate opening and closing

the park, promote access by visitors who have not been

properly oriented to the site’s significance, and encourage an

outdoor recreation rather than a history-based visitor

experience.

The added lands will be feasible to administer, considering their

size, configuration, and ownership:

The 25 to 110 acres below Big Glassy are located adjacent to the

park maintenance and headquarters facility. No specialized

equipment or expertise would be required to administer this

property. A 3 to 5 acre property for visitor center and parking

or 1 to 2 acre property for parking alone will be located near

the front entrance (west of Highway 25 and south of Little

River Road). Administering an additional parking area and

5,000 SF visitor center is well within the capability and

expertise of park staff.

Hazardous substances are not present or can be removed prior

to acquisition:

Hazardous substances are not present on the recommended

lands.

Costs are feasible considering current and future park and

service-wide financial and obligations and priorities:

This plan acknowledges a service-wide financial commitment

by NPS to eliminate its maintenance backlog and understands

that this obligation may continue for several years. The plan

must also, however, provide management direction to the park

for the next 20 years. One of the greatest challenges of this

plan is to craft alternatives flexible enough to respond to the

current fiscal limitations and remain poised for future funding

opportunities. The plan responds to this challenge in four

ways:

1. Phased implementation strategy - projects are phased in

over a 20 year period with the most substantial financial

commitments scheduled during the 10 to 15 year phase.

2. Bridge Projects - a series of smaller, less expensive,

“bridge” projects are used to address immediate needs

until a more substantial future solution can be

implemented. One example of a “bridge” project is the 10

car parking expansion near Front Lake which would

increase parking volume in the existing visitor parking

area by 25 percent until a suitable property can be

acquired for a future 60 car expansion. Another “bridge

project” renovates the existing visitor information station

and an historic structure interior to supplement park

needs for additional exhibit and interpretive space until a

future visitor center can be built.

3. Property acquisition - the plan readily acknowledges that

federal interests in private property can include less than

fee simple options like acquisition of development rights,

donations, or easements.

4. Cost Sharing - the plan readily acknowledges and

encourages cooperative actions with local governments

and other public and private interests to address

common needs.

Land costs in the local area are not excessive by national

standards and the 5,000 SF visitor center in the Sandburg

Center and Paths of Discovery alternatives can be described as

small to moderate in size compared to existing NPS visitor

centers in the Southeast Region.

 Actions Common to All Alternatives 
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

39

The current legislation of the park prohibits acquisition of any

additional interest in property, including interests received by

donation. What this GMP seeks is not a guarantee of funding,

but rather a policy authorization allowing it to seek a

Congressional boundary adjustment at some time in the

future. Without additional authority, the park will be unable to

fully realize its goals of protecting historic views near Big

Glassy and the side pastures, implement a long term solution

to its parking shortage, or substantially improve its ability to

exhibit historic objects and present interpretive programs.

Views and impacts on local communities and surrounding

jurisdictions:

Purchase of property and the design and development of

visitor service infrastructure on property outside the existing

boundary would be undertaken in a spirit of cooperation with

park neighbors, the Village of Flat Rock, and Henderson

County. Opportunities for cooperative use of parking facilities

and other park infrastructure on new lands would be possible.

Walking trails could be added to properties acquired below

Big Glassy. Designs or development plans for facilities on new

lands would encourage and involve the participation of all

park stakeholders as required in the National Environmental

Policy Act.

Any Congressional authorization would include willing seller/

willing buyer language.

Natural resources on added lands will be feasible to manage

with regards to exotic species or other existing or potential

environmental issues:

The properties identified are primarily undisturbed woodland

in a suburban landscape. Few, if any, exotic species are present.

Other potentially significant environmental issues have not

been identified.

Other alternatives for management and resource protection are

not adequate:

The existing boundary authorization prohibits management

and resource protection alternatives that employ purchase of

easement or development rights, fee simple interest, or

acceptance of donated property. Under present conditions,

only two management and protection strategies are viable. The

first relies upon the ability of NPS to influence development

on adjacent lands through consultation. While it is fair to say

that the opinion and interests of NPS are well respected within

the local community, without the authority to acquire interest

in property, NPS’s negotiating position on such matters is

much reduced. The second is best exemplified by the No

Action alternative whose basic premises limit future

interpretation and visitor service infrastructure to what can be

placed within the existing authorized boundary without

significant negative impacts to the historic landscape. At a

minimum, the combination of these approaches leaves the

boundary issue at the Big Glassy summit unresolved. Of

greater concern is the inability of this approach to provide a

broad range of management options to resolve future parking,

visitor service, and interpretation venue needs.

Historic structures

The exteriors of historic structures would be preserved or

restored to the period of significance in all alternatives. The

recommendation of specific treatments or maintenance

techniques for historic structures is beyond the scope of this

document and would be determined in a Historic Structures

Report or similar implementation level plan.

Over time, all administration and maintenance uses of historic

structure interiors would be relocated to the park services or

visitor services zones with the exception of the visitor contact

area in the main house basement which would continue to

function as a bookstore, interpretive area, and assembly point

for house tours.

Relocation of amphitheater

Relocating the amphitheater was a significant planning issue

identified during scoping. A range of alternative sites including

the existing location was considered and a special PMZ

created to establish guidelines for its development.

Three suitable locations were identified based on an analysis

of the environmental impacts and the importance of

advantages associated with each potential site. A description

of the analysis used to select the preferred Amphitheater

relocation sites appears in Appendix B. Potentially significant

environmental impacts associated with relocating the

amphitheater are discussed in conjunction with the

environmental analysis of each alternative in Chapter IV.

Figure B-1 in Appendix B identifies the range of potential

relocation sites considered by the planning team. Only the

three preferred locations are referenced in the alternative

management concepts discussed in this chapter.

A Development Concept Plan or similar implementation level

plan and additional NEPA compliance documentation would

be conducted prior to moving the existing amphitheater to any

of the three preferred sites recommended in this plan. Only

one of the potential relocation sites may be used. Subsequent

 Actions Common to All Alternatives 

Main 

House

Area

Front Lake

Front Pasture

Existing Comfort Station expansion Amphitheater

cstationexpansion.eps

Figure 2-b. Main House area comfort station
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

40

to relocation, PMZs for the remaining relocation sites will be

treated identically to the PMZ that surrounds it and the

existing site restored to its historic appearance.

Main house area comfort station

The existing comfort station near the main house (Figure

2-b) is a manufactured trailer-type structure. The facility is

considered incompatible with the historic scene and does not

adequately serve the needs of park visitors. All alternative

management concepts propose replacing the existing trailer

comfort station with an appropriately designed new facility at

the same location. An area defined by a 40-foot radius

extending outward from the center point of the existing trailer

unit is designated as a Visitor Service Zone to accommodate

the new facility.

Modification of a nearby historic structure for use as a public

comfort station was dismissed as a possible alternative due to

the particularly invasive nature of this type of structural

rehabilitation. A more suitable location near the house or barn

could not be identified.

Design alternatives for the new facility would be developed

and coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Officer

and the public as required by NEPA and NPS policy.

Visitor information station

The existing visitor information station would be expanded

and renovated to enhance its interpretive and visitor

orientation function. The approximate location of the

expansion is shown in Figure 2-c. The following features

would be incorporated into the facility:

Approximately 500 to 1,000 square feet of interior space

Area for display of interpretive media

Area for exhibit of museum objects

Visitor information station and book sale area

Elevator or mechanical lift to connect parking area and

interior of contact station

Public restrooms

Shuttle vehicle

A shuttle vehicle would continue to transport visitors who

need assistance up the steep slope from the parking area to the

main house area. The transport vehicle would be replaced with

a less visually and audibly intrusive vehicle.

Parking areas

Visitor Services Zone:

All three alternatives would add 10 additional parking spaces

in the vicinity of Front Lake. The approximate location of the

parking expansion is shown in Figure 2-c. Site design details

for the expansion would be specified in a development

concept plan or other implementation level plan. If the

existing bus parking spaces were removed as part of the

development concept plan, alternative parking for buses would

be secured prior to construction.

 Actions Common to All Alternatives 

Telephone

Flat Rock 

Playhouse 

Parking

Entrance

Exit

Bus and

Oversize

Parking

Spaces

Trail to 

Main House

Front Lake Trail

Front Lake Trail

Front

Lake

Visitor Information Station

Visitor Information Station expansion

Little River Road

not to scale

North to Village of 

Flat Rock

g Area rkin Pa or sit Vi

Visitor_parkinglot.eps

Parking expansion

for 10 vehicles

Figure 2-c. Visitor Parking Area and Information Station
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

41

 Actions Common to All Alternatives 

Three potential locations for constructing new parking areas

within the existing park boundary were identified. After a

close examination, none of the alternatives was considered

feasible or suitable because of significant negative impacts to

the historic character of the park. The alternative locations

considered and their perceived impacts are described in the

following paragraphs:

Pasture Parking Area: Adding a new parking area in the

historic pasture was discussed and dismissed from

consideration because of unacceptable impacts to the

historic views and cultural resources, construction of

additional paved pedestrian walkways from this remote

parking area to the main visitor areas of the park,

increased traffic congestion on Little River Road, and

breaching the historic fence line.

Volunteer Parking Area: Allowing public parking in the

volunteer parking area was examined as an option but

dismissed from consideration due to the extensive

alteration to the historic back drive and landscape which

would be required to provide public access to this lot.

Headquarters Parking Area: Permitting public parking at

the headquarters building was examined as an option but

dismissed from consideration because of the small size of

the lot, its remote location relative to visitor orientation

facilities, potential impacts to the historic character of the

back gate and fence line, close proximity to the

maintenance facility, and negative impacts on traffic

patterns along Little River Road.

Volunteer parking area

The volunteers parking area would be enlarged to

accommodate a total of 20 vehicles. This lot would only be

used by park volunteers. Figure 2-d shows the approximate

location of the volunteer parking area expansion. While

specific design and construction recommendations are beyond

the scope of this plan, the intent is to increase the number of

parking spaces while remaining sensitive to potential impacts

on the overall historic scene caused by such an addition. Site

Park Headquarters 

and Maintenance Area

Little River Rd.

Expanded 

Volunteer

Parking Area

Barn

Area

volparkingarea.eps

Figure 2-d. Volunteer Parking Area

design details would be specified in a development concept

plan or other implementation level plan. It is anticipated that

the existing 2,000 SF site would be expanded by approximately

1,000 SF. This expansion would not require any physical

changes to the back drive or back gate.

Satellite parking area

The park would acquire a property or interest in property by

purchase, donation, or lease to construct a parking area

outside the currently authorized boundary of the park. The

parking area would be located within walking distance of the

park entrance. The parking area would be a separate 1 to 2

acre entity in Connemara Lifestyle alternative and combined

with the visitor center proposed in the Sandburg Center and

Paths of Discovery alternatives.

Additional infrastructure in the visitor

service zone

Additional visitor service infrastructure would occur within

the visitor services zone:

vehicle and pedestrian circulation system improvements

additions and modifications to walking trail system

the placement of additional outdoor interpretive exhibits,

waysides, or other trail associated amenities.
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

42

 Sandburg Center Alternative 

Sandburg Center Alternative

Concept Description

The Sandburg Center alternative is the proposed action, the

NPS preferred alternative and the environmentally preferred

alternative. Prescriptive management zones for the alternative

are shown in Figure 2-e.

In the Sandburg Center alternative, the park serves as a

national, if not worldwide, focal point for interpretation and

research about Carl Sandburg. The Sandburg Center concept

recognizes that significant Sandburg related resources exist

outside the park. The park already enjoys close relationships

with the University of Illinois Library in Champaign-Urbana

which houses an extensive collection of the author’s

manuscripts and personal correspondence and the Carl

Sandburg Historic Site in Galesburg, Illinois which interprets

his birthplace and life. It is not the intent of the Sandburg

Center concept to duplicate or compete with any of these

institutions but rather to foster strong partnerships that

encourage and support continued learning about the work

and life of Carl Sandburg. The concept directs the park to

coordinate closely with these and other organizations and

individuals to promote knowledge of and access to as

complete a collection of Sandburg related information and

resources as possible.

The Main House and grounds of the park would remain the

center piece of the interpretive program at Connemara. The

intent of this concept is not to divert attention from the

historic significance of these features but, rather, to enhance a

visitor’s understanding of Carl Sandburg by providing access

to more in-depth information about his works and life.

Creating additional high quality interpretive venues is seen as

an essential component of the alternative. Additional venues

would be created by rehabilitating one or more historic

structures near the main house or barn for interpretive

program areas, renovating the existing visitor contact station

to improve its interpretive and visitor services functions, and

creating a visitor center in a new or existing structure on

property purchased or leased by the NPS outside the current

authorized boundary of the park.

Access to Sandburg information, literature, and research

would be provided through an extensive internet database and

other mass media formats. Visitors who come to the site in

person would have an extraordinary opportunity to learn

about Sandburg’s life and works through participation in a

variety of interpretive programs. The alternative provides

additional museum quality environments where visitors would

be able to view objects and other information contained in the

museum collection.

Alternative Highlights and Details

Visitor Center:

Providing high quality interpretive venues is an essential

component of the Sandburg Center alternative. A multiuse

interpretive space to accommodate up to 120 persons (four

standard 30 student public school classes) is particularly

needed. The same interpretive spaces can be used to support

lectures, poetry readings, musical performances, friends group

meetings, staff and employee training sessions, and similar

situations requiring accommodations for larger groups. While

there are provisions within the alternative that allow some

smaller multiuse interpretive spaces in historic structures,

those structures are not suitable for larger spaces. In addition,

particularly active large group interpretive activities may be

more appropriately conducted outside the historic interaction

zone to reduce potential sound and visual impacts on the

historic ambiance in the main house and barn areas.

Increasing access to objects in the museum preservation

center cannot be accomplished without creating additional

climate-controlled exhibit space. Opportunities to create such

spaces within the park are limited.

Based on an examination of the alternative, an

interdisciplinary team of park planners, managers, and

architects from the Southeast Region developed a pre-design

program for the facility. Pre-design programs do not make

recommendations about specific design elements or

construction details. They are, perhaps, best employed as a

communication tool to describe in very general terms the

essential functions and uses, size requirements, and potential

costs associated with a future development. Specific design

and construction details are considered in a Development

Concept Plan. Recommendations in the pre-design program

represent a starting point for a future Development Concept

Plan. A future Development Concept Plan would include

public participation and be conducted in full compliance with

NEPA and NPS management policies.

Recommendations in the pre-design program are based on a

combination of objective data derived from published

resources (DeChiarra, 2001; DeChiarra, 1991; Harris, 1998;

NPS, 2001; NPS, 2001b) and subjective data derived from the

professional experience of members of the interdisciplinary

team. The pre-design program for the Sandburg Center

alternative includes the following elements:

The visitor center would be a new structure or renovated

existing structure located on a site outside of the park’s

currently authorized boundary.
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

43

 Sandburg Center Alternative 

through the guided house interpretive tour. Enhanced access

to information and artifacts contained in the museum

collection would be provided via high quality museum and

interpretive displays at the new visitor center, the expanded

visitor information station, and to a worldwide audience

through the internet.

Historic structures not rehabilitated for interpretive program

venues would be preserved or restored and furnished with

museum objects determined appropriate for exhibit in a nonclimate-controlled environment.

Walking Trails:

Additional trails would be permitted in the visitor services

zone. Walking trails would not be developed in the historic

discovery or historic interaction zones unless they existed

during the period of significance. Walking trails would not be

permitted in the park services zone. Walking trails would only

be permitted in the amphitheater zone as a means to connect

the facility to the main pedestrian circulation system of the

park.

Interpretive waysides and directional signage:

To help orient and direct newly arrived visitors, the presence

of interpretive waysides and directional signage in the visitor

services zone would be increased over the existing conditions.

To advance the interpretive goals of the alternative, more

interpretive waysides would occur in the historic interaction

zone than are present in the existing conditions. As directed in

the historic interaction zone description, the placement of all

waysides and directional signage would be implemented in a

manner compatible with the historic scene.

Interpretive waysides would not be placed in the historic

discovery zone. Directional signage in historic discovery zone

would be reduced to the number essential for visitor safety.

Staffing and Operational Details:

The addition of new staff and facilities would increase

administration and support services responsibilities. It is

anticipated that one additional full time administrative

assistant position would be needed to address the additional

responsibilities.

The addition of new facilities would increase maintenance

work load. It is anticipated that one additional full time

maintenance positions would be needed to address the

additional responsibilities. Volunteer labor could help

supplement maintenance personnel to a small degree.

Resource management responsibilities would increase in

response to the addition of facilities, more visitors, and

coordination of NEPA and Section 106 compliance procedures

associated with the proposed developments. It is anticipated

The facility would be located within walking distance of

the park.

The facility would be acquired and implemented in

multiple phases over time.

Funding for the visitor center could be secured through,

donation, a partnership arrangement, NPS sources, or a

combination thereof.

Approximately 4,000 to 5,000 square feet of interior space

Two modern classrooms suitable for groups up to 30

persons each

One large multipurpose meeting space capable of

accommodating groups up to 120 persons (4 typical

school classes) for lectures, readings, seminars,

multimedia presentation, etc. Space would have capability

to be subdivided into multiple smaller meeting spaces.

Area for display of interactive interpretive media.

Area for exhibit of museum objects

Visitor information station and bookstore

Public restrooms

Administrative offices and staff areas

Suitable parking and landscaping with convenient and

safe pedestrian connection to park entrance. In this

alternative, the parking area of the visitor center would

serve as the satellite parking area described in the

Common Actions section of this chapter.

Historic Structure Interiors:

The basement of the Main House would continue to serve as

a visitor contact area and bookstore. The farm manager’s

house would be used to lodge a poet/artist/scholar in

residence or as a multiuse interpretive venue. One or more

additional historic structure interiors would be rehabilitated

for interpretive program use. Use of historic structure interiors

previously rehabilitated for administrative functions is

preferred over the use of other structures. The goal of any

rehabilitation activity would be to remain sensitive to the

historic character of a structure’s interior and provide the

necessary functionality for use as a multiuse interpretive

venue. The exact number of additional multiuse interpretive

venues would be determined at a future date in a Development

Concept Plan in full compliance with NEPA and NPS

management policies.

Museum Collection:

The Main House would remain the primary venue for

exhibiting museum objects. Public access would be provided
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

44

 Sandburg Center Alternative 

that two additional staff members will be required to fulfill the

increased natural resource monitoring and management,

NEPA compliance, and cultural landscape management

responsibilities. Volunteers would play an essential role by

helping to measure and documenting natural and cultural

resource conditions on an ongoing basis.

Additional museum and curatorial staff would be needed to

provide support for interpretive programs and coordinate

collection preservation and conservation treatments resulting

from increased access to objects and manuscripts. It is

anticipated that two additional full time positions would be

required to address this need. Volunteer labor would continue

to play a critical role in fulfilling the preservation

responsibilities of the park.

Responsibility of the interpretive staff is significantly increased

in this alternative because of its focus on creating dynamic and

interactive visitor interpretation programs. It is anticipated that

two additional full time positions would be required over time

to address the increased work load of program development

and presentation and to staff new facilities. Volunteer labor

would continue to play a critical role in accomplishing the

interpretive program efforts of the park.

More visitors, facilities, and land would require the addition of

a full-time law enforcement ranger to properly enforce park

regulations.

Boundary Expansion:

Approximately 3 to 5 acres is needed to construct a visitor

center and parking area. Anticipated minimum development

includes parking for 60 cars, paved walkways or sidewalks

connecting the facility to the park entrance, a visitor center,

and landscaping to blend site development into the local

historic setting of the Village of Flat Rock. Given the

unpredictable availability of funding and property, an exact

location for the visitor center and parking area is not identified

at this time; however, any selected site would be located west

of Highway 25 and south of Little River Road in the Village of

Flat Rock.

Approximately 110 acres are identified outside the existing

boundary where development could negatively impact the

historic character of the park (Figure 2-e). Because these areas

are located outside the existing boundary, the park has very

little influence over how they might be developed. A boundary

expansion would allow the park to protect these properties

through the purchase of development easements or fee simple

interest.

Any property or easement acquired under an expanded

boundary authorization would occur under a willing seller/

willing buyer arrangement.

Needed or Allowable Changes

Visitor Experience:

The primary visitor experience focuses on the historic

character of the park and in particular on the main house, its

historic furnishings, and the surrounding grounds. This

alternative increases opportunities for visitors to learn more

about the life and works of Carl Sandburg by providing

additional interpretive activities in the main house and barn

areas, the amphitheater, an expanded visitor information

station, and at a new visitor center. Enhanced opportunities

for visitors to participate in interpretive programs, view

exhibits, and access information would allow park staff to

create a wider range of Sandburg related interpretive

experiences than the existing conditions.

An expanded visitor information station would enhance the

orientation of visitors prior to entering the historic areas of the

park. Visitor services provided at the facility would include,

but not be limited to, a staffed information desk, house tour

ticket sales, access to program information and activity

registration, distribution of park maps, coordination of shuttle

service, environmentally controlled exhibit space, interpretive

displays, comfort station, and book sales.

Additional interpretive waysides in the visitor services and

historic interaction zones will provide more frequent

opportunities to learn about Carl Sandburg. The appropriate

number and location of waysides would be determined in a

comprehensive interpretive master plan, cultural landscape

report, trail management plan, or development concept plan.

The sights and sounds of people participating in interpretive

programs and activities would be more evident in the house

and barn areas than existing conditions during periods of

moderate to high visitation. While it would be possible for

visitors to experience solitude on the wooded trails, at Big

Glassy overlook, and in pasture areas on most non-peak days,

less opportunity for solitude or contemplative experiences

would be present in this alternative than the existing

conditions during periods of peak visitation.

Cultural and Natural Resources:

Additional interpretive program venues would be created near

the main house and barn areas by rehabilitating the interiors

of one or more historic structures in the historic interaction

zone. The farm manager’s house, currently used as a ranger

residence, would be used as a residence by a poet/artist/

scholar or for multiuse interpretive program areas. The ranger

residence would be moved to a new facility in the park services

zone.

The number of historic structure interiors used for interpretive

programs would be determined by a future Development

Concept Plan or Interpretive Plan. It is important to note that
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

45

 Sandburg Center Alternative 

Sandburg Center Alternative

a

a

a

Historic Interaction

Zone extends 25'

from centerline of trail

in both directions

Please note that PMZ boundary 

does not imply removal of trees 

or other vegetation

a

Main 

House

Area

centermap.eps

Front Lake

Side Lake

US Hwy 25

Park Headquarters 

and Maintenance Area

Note:

Shaded area = 110 acres

3 to 5 acre administative

boundary authorization not shown 

Carl Sandburg 

Home NHS

Summit of Big Glassy

Elevation: 2740 ft.

Expanded 

Volunteer

Parking Area

Barn

Area

Comfort

Station

Front Pasture

Side Pastures

Village of Flat Rock

Existing 

Amphitheater

Visitor Entrance and Parking

Prescriptive Management Zones 

North

Note: Scale is approximate 

Historic Discovery

Historic Interaction Tree line

Buildings

Rock outcrops

Fence lines

Walking trails

Park boundary

Visitor Services

Park Services

a Preferred Amphitheater Relocation Site

FEET

0 250 500

Map Symbols

Little River Road

 Expanded Visitor Information Station

Boundary Expansion Inset 

Area of Expansion

Potential Area for Added Parking

Farm

Mgr's

House

Figure 2-e. Sandburg Center Prescriptive Management Zones
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

46

rehabilitation of any historic structure interior would not

occur prior to a detailed documentation of the historic

resource by the NPS and a public review of the proposed NPS

rehabilitation action using the appropriate level of park

planning and NEPA compliance documentation.

The construction of new trails would not occur in the historic

interaction or historic discovery zones unless such trails

existed during the period of significance. The siting of

interpretive waysides and benches along historic trails in the

historic interaction zone would be placed with a sensitivity to

the historic character of the site. Visible interpretive media,

trail side benches, trash cans and other nonessential visitor

services infrastructure would be removed, if present, from the

historic discovery zone. Trail amenities would not be placed

on granite rock domes.

The existing amphitheater near the main house would be

replaced by a new facility constructed at one of the three sites

identified in this GMP. The landscape of the old amphitheater

would be restored to period of significance conditions. Design

alternatives for the new amphitheater would be developed in a

more detailed planning document and coordinated with the

State Historic Preservation Officer and the public as required

by NEPA and NPS policy.

The existing trailer comfort station near the main house would

be replaced by an appropriately designed new facility. Design

alternatives would be developed in a more detailed planning

document and coordinated with the State Historic

Preservation Officer and the public as required by NEPA and

NPS policy.

The non-historic walking trails in the visitor services zone

would remain and additional trails could be added. Design

alternatives would be developed in a more detailed planning

document and coordinated with the State Historic

Preservation Officer and the public as required by NEPA and

NPS policy.

Administrative and maintenance use of historic structures in

the historic interaction and historic discovery zone would be

moved to the park services zone over time. Historic structures

vacated by administrative or maintenance activities will be

preserved or restored to the period of significance and

incorporated into the interpretive program of the park or

rehabilitated as a multiuse program venue. Facilities in the

park services zone would be expanded as necessary to

accommodate the relocated functions.

Prescriptive Management Zones

Figure 2-e shows the arrangement of PMZs for the Sandburg

Center alternative. Approximate distribution of PMZs for the

alternative is:

129 acres (49%) - Historic Discovery Zone

122 acres (46%) - Historic interaction zone

1 acre (~.5%) - Amphitheater Relocation Zone

8 acres (3%) - Visitor Services Zone

4 acres (1.5%) - Park Services Zone

Providing visitors with a variety of opportunities to access

information about Carl Sandburg is critical to the success of

this concept. The large historic interaction zone reflects this

importance by providing areas where the creation,

development, and implementation of dynamic interpretation

and museum programs can occur.

Almost 50% of the park is placed in the historic discovery

zone. As new trail construction is not permitted in the zone

and no additional trails are known from the period of

significance, approximately 129 acres is reserved for visitors

who wish to experience a sense of solitude and for wildlife

habitat.

A visitor services zone of approximately 8 acres is placed in the

northeast corner of the park to accommodate the visitor

parking area, the non-historic loop trail around Front Lake,

and the visitor contact/comfort station.

A park services zone of approximately 4 acres is placed in the

northwest corner of the park to accommodate a small

expansion of the existing administrative, museum

preservation, and maintenance facilities to support interpretive

programs and the administrative support functions that will be

relocated from historic structures near the main house.

Phased Implementation

A phased implementation strategy for the Sandburg Center

Alternative is recommended. While it is recognized that

unforeseen opportunities or obstacles may necessitate

deviation from the suggested plan, the plan does provide a

general implementation strategy and timetable for use in

comparing the alternatives.

Phased implementation would occur over four five-year

phases.

Phase I: 1 to 5 years

Phase 1 concentrates on implementing recommendations that

are cost effective and provide relatively fast relief from pressing

park problems. The main goal of this phase is to address the

park’s immediate needs while beginning the information

gathering and implementation planning processes that will

eventually address more complex issues. Important

accomplishments of Phase 1 are:

boundary expansion legislation

development concept plan for visitor parking area

including conceptual schematics for expansion of the

visitor contact station.

 Sandburg Center Alternative 
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

47

 Sandburg Center Alternative 

development concept plan, including conceptual

schematics, for creating additional interpretive program

areas near main house and barn areas.

replace trailer restroom with new structure

creation of additional parking spaces in visitor parking

area

implementation planning for web site and associated

information database. Web site development, data

collection, and processing begins.

protect up to 30 acres of the most vulnerable adjacent

property by easement or fee simple purchase

Phase 2: 5 to 10 years

The focus of phase 2 is to create additional interpretive venues

and enhanced interpretation and museum programs.

Implementation planning for the visitor center should begin in

this phase. Important accomplishments of Phase 2 are::

construction of expanded visitor contact station in

accordance with DCP

creation of additional interpretive program areas in

accordance with DCP

web site and data base fully operational

protect up to 30 additional acres of the most vulnerable

adjacent property by easement or fee simple purchase

identify potential site for Visitor Center

Phase 3: 10 to 15 years

The focus of phase 3 is to consolidate progress made in

previous phases and begin implementation of visitor center:

acquire site for visitor center

relocate amphitheater

construct visitor center and integrate into interpretive

program of park

protect up to 10 additional acres of the most vulnerable

adjacent property by easement or fee simple purchase

Phase 4: 15 years to 20 years and beyond

The focus of phase 4 is to work towards complete

implementation of the alternative by:

hire and train staff to ensure long term success of

alternative

evaluate progress and revise strategies for complete

implementation of alternative if necessary

protect remaining vulnerable adjacent property by

easement or fee simple purchase

Cost Estimate

Figure 2-f presents a rough estimate of the implementation

and long term operating and maintenance costs associated

with the alternative.

Costs associated with protecting the 110 acre boundary

expansion are indicated as a range and not incorporated into

the total figures because they will vary based on the protection

measure employed. While most areas may be adequately

protected by acquiring easements or development rights, fee

simple acquisition of property should remain a management

option.

In general, costs were developed using conceptual-type (class

“C”) estimates for Fiscal Year (FY) 2001. These costs include

allowances for design, project supervision, installation/

construction, and contingencies. More detailed and accurate

cost estimates would need to be developed when the park is

closer to implementing individual actions.

The costs shown are provided as an aid for comparing the

alternatives and should not be used for budgetary purposes.
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

48

 Sandburg Center Alternative 

Implementation

Action

Annual 

Cost

Estimated 

Development 

Cost

Visitor center 

Additional trail amenities 

Comfort station 

Historic structure interior rehabilitation 

for interpretive program venues 

Amphitheater relocation and site restoration 

Visitor information station renovation 

Visitor parking area expansion 

Staffing 

$ 2,900,000 

$ 43,000

$ 75,000

$ 175,000

$ 55,000

$ 383,000

$ 74,000

$ 3,715,000

$ 65,000 

$ 360,000

$ 8,000

$ 3,000

$ 1,000

$ 2,000

$ 1,000

$ 1,000

$ 1,000

$ 442,000 

SC_CostTable.eps

Total 

Protection of properties located in 

boundary expansion 

Volunteer parking area expansion $ 10,000

$ 300,000 to 

$ 2,250,000 0 to $10,000

Figure 2-f. Sandburg Center Cost Estimate
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

49

Concept Description

In the Paths of Discovery alternative, the park would

strategically blend the community’s need for additional

walking opportunities with the mission and overall function of

the National Historic Site. In turn, the park would look

outward to the community for help with internal park needs

such as additional parking, enhanced visitor services, and

administrative infrastructure. The Paths of Discovery

alternative acknowledges the important bond that exists

between the park, local governments, and park neighbors and

relies upon its traditionally close partnerships with them to

identify, protect, and enhance both park resources and local

quality of life values. Prescriptive management zones for the

alternative are shown in Figure 2-h.

Many people visit the park specifically to enjoy its pastoral

beauty. The Paths of Discovery alternative would incorporate

the activity of walking as a significant component of the

interpretive program by adding a pedestrian only interpretive

trail connecting the visitor entrance area with the historic back

gate and the barn area. Enhanced interpretive opportunities

would be available at an improved visitor information station

in the visitor services zone.

A visitor center would be created in a new or existing structure

on property purchased or leased outside the current

authorized boundary of the park. The visitor center would be

developed in partnership or through donation of property

and/or services with preservation groups, friends groups,

individuals, and/or local, county, and state governments to

reduce development and/or maintenance costs to the NPS.

Specific details regarding such partnerships or donations

would be developed at a future date in a memorandum of

understanding or partnership agreement.

Alternative Highlights and Details

Walking Trails:

A 3/4 mile long interpretive trail would connect the visitor

parking area to the barn area. The new trail would include up

to 10 interpretive stations to help visitors better understand the

significance of Carl Sandburg’s life and work. A potential

configuration of the trail is shown in Figure 2-g. Design details

of the trail would be specified in a development concept plan

or other implementation level planning document.

Additional trails would be permitted near Front Lake in the

visitor services zone. Trails that did not exist during the period

of significance would not be permitted in the historic

discovery or historic interaction zones. Walking trails are only

permitted in the amphitheater zone as a means to connect the

facility to the main pedestrian circulation system of the park.

Walking trails would not be permitted in the park services

zone.

Interpretive waysides and directional signage:

In order to advance the alternative’s interpretive goals, up to

ten interpretive stations would be sensitively placed at intervals

along the new connector trail and up to three along the Big

Glassy trail. Directional and regulatory signage could be

incorporated into the design of the interpretive stations.

Location and design details of interpretive stations would be

specified in a development concept plan or other

implementation level planning document that included the

appropriate level of NEPA and National Historic Preservation

Act compliance and public participation.

The presence of interpretive waysides would increase in the

historic interaction zone over the existing conditions. As

directed in the historic interaction zone description, the

placement of all waysides and directional signage would be

implemented in a manner that minimized their visual impact

on the historic scene.

Interpretive waysides are not currently present in areas

designated historic discovery zone in this concept. Directional

signage in the historic discovery zone would be reduced to the

minimum number essential for visitor safety.

Visitor Center:

Based on an examination of the alternative, an

interdisciplinary team of park planners, managers, and

architects from the Southeast Region developed a pre-design

program for the facility. Pre-design programs do not make

recommendations about specific design elements or

construction details. They are, perhaps, best employed as a

 Paths of Discovery Alternative 

Paths of Discovery Alternative

Figure 2-g. Interpretive trail location

Side Lake

Park HQ

Volunteer

Parking Area

Barn

Area

Comfort

Station

Front Pasture

Interpretive Trail

Visitor Parking Area

Interpretive Trail

interptrail.eps

Little River Road

Farm

Mgr's

House
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

50

communication tool to describe in very general terms the

essential functions and uses, size requirements, and potential

costs associated with a future development. Specific design

and construction details are considered in a Development

Concept Plan. Recommendations in the pre-design program

represent a starting point for a future Development Concept

Plan.

The park would develop a future Development Concept Plan

in association with its planning partners and include public

participation in full compliance with NEPA and NPS

management policies. Recommendations in the pre-design

program are based on a combination of objective data derived

from published resources (DeChiarra, 2001; DeChiarra, 1991;

Harris, 1998; NPS, 2001; NPS, 1995) and subjective data derived

from the professional experience of members of the

interdisciplinary team. The pre-design program includes the

following:

A visitor center with capabilities for shared use is an important

aspect of this alternative. Multiuse meeting space that can

accommodate large groups up to 120 persons is particularly

needed. This space should have the ability to be divided into

smaller spaces in varying combinations to support interpretive

programs lectures, poetry readings, musical performances,

public meetings, staff and employee training sessions, or

similar occurrences requiring accommodations for groups of

varying sizes.

The visitor center would be a new structure or renovated

existing structure located on a site outside of the park’s

currently authorized boundary.

The facility would be located within walking distance of

the park.

The facility would be acquired and implemented in

multiple phases over time.

Funding for the visitor center could be secured through,

donation, a partnership arrangement, NPS sources, or a

combination thereof.

Approximately 4,000 to 5,000 square feet of interior space

Two modern classrooms suitable for groups up to 30

persons each. Classrooms should be able to be combined

into one large room (full time Sandburg Interpretive

activities)

One large multipurpose meeting space capable of

accommodating groups up to 120 persons (4 typical

school classes) for lectures, readings, seminars,

multimedia presentation, etc. Space would have capability

to be subdivided into multiple smaller meeting spaces.

(shared use)

Area for display of Sandburg related interpretive media.

 Paths of Discovery Alternative 

Area for exhibit of Sandburg related museum objects

Visitor information station and bookstore (potential

shared use)

Public restrooms

Administrative offices and staff areas (potential shared

use)

Suitable parking and landscaping with convenient and

safe pedestrian connection to park entrance. In this

alternative, the parking area of the visitor center could be

shared with its facility partners and would serve as the

satellite parking area described in the Common Actions

section of this chapter.

Historic Structures:

All administrative and maintenance operations based in

historic structures, with the exception of the visitor contact

area and bookstore in the main house basement and the

ranger residence in the farm manager’s house would be

relocated to the park services or visitor services zones. Historic

structure interiors would not be rehabilitated for interpretive

program areas in this alternative with the exception of the

previously rehabilitated main house garage.

Over time, historic structure interiors would be preserved or

restored to period of significance conditions, furnished with

historic materials as appropriate, and incorporated into the

interpretive program of the park.

Museum Collection:

Museum objects would continue to be exhibited at the main

house with accessibility provided by guided house interpretive

tour. Increased access to information and artifacts contained

in the museum collection would be available to visitors via

high quality museum and interpretive displays at the new

visitor center, the expanded visitor information station, and to

a wider audience through the internet. Historic structures may

be furnished with museum objects as determined appropriate

for exhibit in non-climate-controlled environments.

Staffing and Operational Details:

The addition of new staff and facilities would increase

administration and support services responsibilities. It is

anticipated that one additional full time administrative

assistant position would be needed to address the additional

responsibilities.

Maintenance responsibilities increase due to the addition of

additional interpretive trails and off site facilities. It is

anticipated that one additional full time maintenance position

would need to be added over time to address the increased
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

51

 Paths of Discovery Alternative 

Please note that PMZ boundary 

does not imply removal of trees 

or other vegetation

a

a

a

pathsmap.eps

Front Lake

Side Lake

Summit of Big Glassy

Elevation: 2740 ft.

Paths of Discovery Alternative

Prescriptive Management Zones 

North

Note: Scale is approximate 

Historic Discovery

Historic Interaction

Tree line

Buildings

Rock outcrops

Fence lines

Walking trails

Park boundary

Visitor Services

Park Services

a Preferred Amphitheater Relocation Site

FEET

0 250 500

Map Symbols

Historic Interaction

Zone extends 25'

from centerline of trail

in both directions

Main 

House

Area

Farm

Mgr's

House

US Hwy 25

Park Headquarters 

and Maintenance Area

Volunteer

Parking Area

Barn

Area

Comfort

Station

Side Pastures

Village of Flat Rock

Existing 

Amphitheater

Visitor Entrance and Parking

Little River Road

Visitor Information Station

Note:

Shaded area = 110 acres

3 to 5 acre administative

boundary authorization not shown

Carl Sandburg 

Home NHS

Boundary Expansion Inset 

Area of Expansion

Figure 2-h. Paths of Discovery Prescriptive Management Zones
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

52

work load. Volunteers could help supplement the maintenance

function to a significant degree.

Resources management responsibilities would increase in

response the addition of facilities, more visitors, and

coordination of NEPA and Section 106 compliance

procedures associated with the proposed developments. It is

anticipated that one additional staff member will be required

to fulfill the increased natural resource monitoring and

management, NEPA compliance, and cultural landscape

management responsibilities. Volunteers would play an

essential role by helping to measure and document natural and

cultural resource conditions on a regular basis.

The creation of additional intellectual access points at on site

and off site locations and the aging of the museum collection

would increase work load for museum and curatorial staff. It

is anticipated that one additional full time position would be

needed to address the increased work load. This alternative

relies heavily on professionally trained volunteers to fulfill the

preservation responsibilities of the park.

Responsibility of the interpretive staff is increased by the

addition of the visitor center and the need to coordinate an

extensive volunteer and friends group network. It is

anticipated that one additional position will be needed to

address the increased work load and potentially staff new

facilities. Volunteers would continue to make a very significant

contribution to the interpretive program efforts of the park.

More visitors, facilities, and land would require the addition of

a full-time law enforcement ranger to properly enforce park

regulations.

Boundary Expansion:

If necessary, a Congressionally legislated boundary expansion

of 3 to 5 acres would be undertaken to help facilitate the

selection and acquisition of an appropriate site for the visitor

center. Given the unpredictable availability of funding and

property, an exact location for the visitor center and parking

area is not identified at this time; however, any selected site

would be located west of Highway 25 and south of Little River

Road in the Village of Flat Rock.

Approximately 110 acres are identified outside the existing

boundary where development could negatively impact the

historic character of the park (Figure 2-h). Because these

areas are located outside the existing boundary, the park has

very little influence over how they might be developed. A

boundary expansion would allow the park to protect these

properties through the purchase of development easements or

fee simple purchase. Any property or easement acquired

under an expanded boundary authorization would occur

under a willing seller/willing buyer arrangement.

Needed or Allowable Changes

Visitor Experience:

The Paths of Discovery alternative would create opportunities

for visitors to access more of the park by foot. By increasing

access to historic views and placing interpretive information

along walking routes, visitors are encouraged to learn more

about Carl Sandburg and participate in other interpretive

activities at the park.

While the primary visitor experience will remain focused on

the park’s cultural and historic resources, many local visitors

will use the park for its recreational value. The presence of

more people walking in the park may reduce opportunities for

solitude or a contemplative experience at certain times of the

day or season.

The visitor contact area in the basement of the main house

would remain in place. However, the expanded visitor

information station would become the main orientation point

for visitors entering the main house and barn areas. Visitor

services available at the facility would include a staffed

information desk, house tour ticket sales, access to program

information and activity registration, distribution of park

maps, coordination of shuttle service, environmentally

controlled exhibit space, interpretive displays, comfort station,

and book sales.

High quality interpretive, exhibit, and visitor information

services would be provided at a new visitor center located on

a site outside of the currently authorized boundary. Some

visitor’s park experiences may begin at the visitor center

rather than the visitor contact station at the park.

Cultural and Natural Resources:

To accommodate the new interpretive trail, the visitor services

zone extends in a narrow band outside the fence line along

Little River Road and parallel to the back drive. Some of the

land within this zone would be graded to accommodate the

new trail and interpretive stations. The visitor services zone in

this alternative contains approximately 6 more acres than the

other alternatives.

The construction of new trails would not occur in the historic

interaction or historic discovery zones unless such trails

existed during the period of significance. The sensitive siting

of additional interpretive waysides and benches along historic

trails in the historic interaction zone would occur. Visible

interpretive media, trail side benches, trash cans and other

nonessential visitor services infrastructure would be removed,

if present, from the historic discovery zone. Trail amenities

would not be place on granite rock domes.

 Paths of Discovery Alternative 
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

53

 Paths of Discovery Alternative 

The existing comfort station near the Sandburg Home would

be replaced by a more functional facility. Design alternatives

would be developed in a more detailed planning document

and coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Officer

and the public as required by NEPA and NPS policy.

The existing amphitheater near the main house would be

replaced by a new facility constructed at one of the three sites

identified in this GMP. The landscape of the old amphitheater

would be restored to period of significance conditions. Design

alternatives for the new amphitheater would be developed in a

more detailed planning document and coordinated with the

State Historic Preservation Officer and the public as required

by NEPA and NPS policy.

The visitor parking and entrance area on Little River Road

would be redesigned and enlarged to accommodate 10

additional vehicles. Design alternatives for these improvements

would be proposed in a development concept plan and

coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Officer and

the public as required by NEPA and NPS policy.

All administrative and maintenance operations based in

historic structures, with the exception of the visitor contact

area and bookstore in the main house basement and the

ranger residence in the farm manager’s house would be

relocated to the park services or visitor services zones over

time. Facilities in the park services zone would be expanded

as necessary to accommodate the relocated functions.

Prescriptive Management Zones

Figure 2-h shows the arrangement of PMZs for the Paths of

Discovery alternative. Approximate distribution of PMZs for

the alternative is:

181 acres (68.5%) - Historic Discovery Zone

64 acres (24%) - Historic Interaction Zone

1 acre (~.5%) - Amphitheater Relocation Zone

15 acres (6%) - Visitor Services Zone

3 acres (1%) - Park Services Zone

Maintaining the pastoral character of the landscape is an

important aspect of this alternative and approximately 68.5%

of the park is located within the historic discovery zone where

changes to it are minimized. Most woodland trails on the site

appear as they did during the period of significance.

To accommodate the new interpretive connector trail, the

visitor services zone is increased by approximately 6 acres over

the other alternatives.

A 3 acre park services zone is placed in the northwest corner

of the park to accommodate the existing administrative,

museum preservation, and maintenance facilities. The park

services zone is slightly smaller in this alternative to make

room for the new interpretive trail and corresponding visitor

services zone corridor.

Phased Implementation

A phased implementation strategy for the Paths of Discovery

alternative is recommended. While it is recognized that

unforeseen opportunities or obstacles may necessitate

deviation from the suggested plan, the plan does provide a

general implementation strategy and timetable for use in

comparing the alternatives.

Phased implementation would occur over four five-year

phases.

Phase I: 1 to 5 years

Phase 1 concentrates on implementing recommendations that

are cost effective and provide relatively fast relief from pressing

park problems. The main goal of this phase is to address the

park’s immediate needs while beginning the information

gathering and implementation planning processes that will

eventually address more complex issues. Important

accomplishments of Phase 1 are:

boundary expansion legislation

development concept plan for visitor parking area

including conceptual schematics for expansion of the

visitor contact station.

replace trailer restroom with new structure

creation of additional parking spaces in visitor parking

area

implementation planning for web site and associated

information database. Web site development, data

collection, and processing begins.

explore and develop potential partner relationships that

could lead to creation of visitor center and interpretive

trail

protect up to 30 acres of the most vulnerable adjacent

property by easement or fee simple purchase

Phase 2: 5 to 10 years

The focus of phase 2 is to create additiona interpretive venues

and enhanced interpretation and museum programs.

Implementation planning for the visitor center should begin in

this phase. Important accomplishments of Phase 2 are::

construction of expanded visitor contact station in

accordance with DCP

web site and data base fully operational

partnerships in place to allow visitor center and

interpretive trail planning to commence
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

54

protect up to 30 additional acres of the most vulnerable

adjacent property by easement or fee simple purchase

Phase 3: 10 to 15 years

The focus of phase 3 is to consolidate progress made in

previous phases and begin implementation of visitor center:

acquire site for visitor center

relocate amphitheater

development concept plans for visitor center and

interpretive trail

construct visitor center and integrate into interpretive

program of park

protect up to 10 additional acres of the most vulnerable

adjacent property by easement or fee simple purchase

Phase 4: 15 years to 20 years and beyond

The focus of phase 4 is to work towards complete

implementation of the alternative by:

construct interpretive trail and integrate into interpretive

program of park

hire and train staff to ensure long term success of

alternative

 Paths of Discovery Alternative 

evaluate progress and revise strategies for complete

implementation of alternative if necessary

protect remaining vulnerable adjacent property by

easement or fee simple purchase

Cost Estimate

Figure 2-i presents a rough estimate of the implementation and

long term operating and maintenance costs associated with

the alternative.

Costs associated with protecting the 110 acre boundary

expansion are indicated as a range and not incorporated into

the total figures because they will vary based on the protection

measure employed. While most areas may be adequately

protected by acquiring easements or development rights, fee

simple acquisition of property should remain a management

option.

In general, costs were developed using conceptual-type (class

“C”) estimates for Fiscal Year 2001. These costs include

allowances for design, project supervision, installation/

construction, and contingencies. More detailed and accurate

cost estimates would need to be developed when the park is

closer to implementing individual actions.

The costs shown are provided as an aid for comparing the

alternatives and should not be used for budgetary purposes.

Implementation

Action

Annual 

Cost

Estimated 

Development 

Cost

Visitor center 

Additional trails and trail amenities 

Comfort station 

Amphitheater relocation and site restoration 

Visitor contact station renovation 

Visitor parking area expansion 

Staffing 

$ 2,900,000 

$ 378,000

$ 75,000

$ 55,000

$ 383,000

$ 56,000

$ 3,857,000

$ 58,000 

$ 280,000

$ 8,000

$ 3,000

$ 15,000

$ 1,000

$ 1,000

$ 1,000

$ 367,000 

PD_CostTable.eps

Total 

Protection of properties located in 

boundary expansion 

Volunteer parking area expansion $ 10,000

$ 300,000 to 

$ 2,250,000 0 to $10,000

Figure 2-i. Paths of Discovery Cost Estimate
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

55

 Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 

Connemara Lifestyle Alternative

Concept Description

In the Connemara Lifestyle alternative, visitors would

experience Connemara much as Carl Sandburg knew it. Park

management would concentrate its efforts and resources on

maintenance of the site’s historic landscape, structures, and

furnishings and providing high quality interpretive programs

on site and at local schools. Prescriptive management zones

for the alternative are shown in Figure 2-j.

Primary access to the objects and information contained in the

museum collection would occur at the main house, the

expanded visitor information station, and through the internet

or other mass media formats. Opportunities for access to

objects and information would be greater than existing

conditions but less than the Sandburg Center or Paths of

Discovery alternatives.

An improved visitor information station in the visitor services

zone, expansion of the existing parking area, and additional

NPS controlled parking area outside the currently authorized

boundary of the park would improve the parks ability to serve

park visitors.

The Connemara Lifestyle alternative acknowledges the

uncertainty of receiving significantly increased federal funding

by taking a more conservative approach than the Sandburg

Center or Paths of Discovery alternatives to new

infrastructure, staff increases, and added maintenance

responsibilities.

Alternative Highlights and Details

Visitor Center:

A visitor center is not proposed in this alternative.

Historic Structures:

All administrative and maintenance operations based in

historic structures, with the exception of the visitor contact

area and bookstore in the main house basement and the

ranger residence in the farm manager’s house would be

relocated to the park services or visitor services zones. Historic

structure interiors would not be rehabilitated for multiuse

interpretive areas in this alternative with the exception of the

previously rehabilitated main house garage.

Over time, historic structure interiors would be preserved or

restored to period of significance conditions, furnished with

historic materials as appropriate, and incorporated into the

interpretive program of the park.

Museum Collection:

Museum objects would continue to be exhibited at the main

house with accessibility provided by guided house interpretive

tour. Increased access to information and artifacts contained

in the museum collection would be provided via high quality

museum and interpretive displays at the expanded visitor

information station, through the internet, and using

partnerships with other cultural resource entities. Historic

structures may be furnished with museum objects determined

appropriate for exhibit in a non-climate-controlled

environment. The amount of museum exhibit space created in

the Connemara Lifestyle alternative would be greater than the

no-action alternative but significantly less than either the

Sandburg Center or Paths of Discovery alternatives.

Walking Trails:

The construction of additional trails is permitted in the visitor

services zone. Additional walking trails would not be

developed in the historic discovery or historic interaction

zones unless they existed during the period of significance.

Walking trails are not permitted in the park services zone.

Walking trails are only permitted in the amphitheater zone as

a means to connect the facility to the main pedestrian

circulation system of the park.

Interpretive waysides and directional signage:

To help orient and direct newly arrived visitors, the presence

of interpretive waysides and directional signage in the visitor

services zone would be increased over the existing conditions.

The presence of interpretive waysides would decrease in the

historic interaction zone over the existing conditions for this

alternative. As directed in the historic interaction zone

description, the exact number and placement of waysides and

directional signage would be implemented in a manner that

minimized their visual impact on the historic scene.

Interpretive waysides present in areas designated historic

discovery zone would be removed or relocated to the visitor

services zone. Directional signage in the historic discovery

zone would be reduced to the number essential for visitor

safety.

Staffing and Operational Details:

Administration and support services personnel continue to

provide adequate supervisory management and/or

administrative support for park personnel and activities

without increasing staff levels.
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

56

Maintenance staff continues to perform all of the maintenance

responsibilities associated with the park. Current staffing levels

are unchanged. Volunteers supplement the maintenance

function.

Resources management staff increase by 1 position to

accomplish the NEPA and Section 106 compliance, safety

management, natural and cultural resource inventory and

monitoring responsibilities. More visitors result in a gradually

increasing work over time but staff is able to adapt by limiting

its operation to the most essential functions and improving

efficiency through new technology.

The creation of additional intellectual access points and the

aging of the museum collection would increase work load for

museum and curatorial staff. It is anticipated that one

additional full time position would be needed to address the

increased work load. This alternative relies heavily on

volunteer labor to fulfill the preservation responsibilities of the

park.

The park interpretive staff continues to provide high quality

visitor interpretation services to people on site and in local

community. It is anticipated that one additional full time

position would be needed to address the increased work load.

Volunteers continue to make a critical contribution to the

interpretive program efforts of the park.

More visitors and land would require the addition of a fulltime law enforcement ranger to properly enforce park

regulations.

Boundary Expansion:

A Congressionally legislated boundary expansion of up to 1 to

2 acres would be undertaken to facilitate the selection and

acquisition of an appropriate site for the parking area. Also,

interest in a 22 acre property near back gate and authorization

for three acres near the summit of Big Glassy are desired to

protect scenic views (Figure 2-k) are identified. A boundary

expansion would allow the park to protect these areas by

purchase in fee simple, easement, or the acquisition of

development rights. Any interest in property acquired under

an expanded boundary authorization would occur under a

willing seller/willing buyer arrangement.

Needed or Allowable Changes

Visitor Experience:

NPS quality guided interpretive programs would continue to

be the central focus of the visitor experience. The basement of

main house will continue to function as an information and

contact station, bookstore, and assembly point for house

tours.

The park entry experience will be made safer and more

convenient by improving vehicle and pedestrian circulation,

increasing the number of parking spaces near Front Lake, and

providing more opportunities to become oriented to the site

before entering the historic areas.

The expanded visitor information station would become the

main orientation point for visitors prior to entering the main

house and barn areas. Visitor services available at the facility

would include but not be limited to a staffed information desk,

house tour ticket sales, access to program information and

activity registration, distribution of park maps, coordination

of shuttle service, environmentally controlled exhibit space,

interpretive displays, comfort station, and book sales.

Cultural and Natural Resources:

The existing visitor information station would be enlarged to

provide additional interpretive, and information capabilities.

Design alternatives would be developed in a more detailed

planning document and coordinated with the State Historic

Preservation Officer and the public as required by NEPA and

NPS policy.

An additional parking area located on a site outside of the

currently authorized boundary would be created. Funding and

management responsibility for facility would be the

responsibility of the NPS. The facility would be located within

walking distance of the park.

All administrative and maintenance use of historic structures

in the historic interaction and historic discovery zone would

be moved to the park services zone over time. Facilities in the

park services zone would be expanded as necessary to

accommodate the relocated functions.

The historic landscape would be maintained to reflect the

period of significance to the greatest extent possible. The most

appropriate landscape treatments and maintenance techniques

would be detailed in a cultural landscape report or similar

implementation level plan.

Existing interpretive waysides and benches along historic trails

in the historic interaction zone would remain. No additional

non-historic interpretive materials would be placed in the

historic interaction zone in this alternative. Visible interpretive

media, trail side benches, trash cans and other nonessential

visitor services infrastructure would be removed, if present,

from the historic discovery zone. Additional interpretive

waysides would occur in the visitor services zone. The

appropriate number and location for these elements would be

determined in a comprehensive interpretive master plan,

cultural landscape report, trail management plan, or

development concept plan. Trail side amenities would not be

placed on granite rock domes.

 Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

57

a

a

a

lifestylemap.eps

Front Lake

Side Lake

Please note that PMZ boundary 

does not imply removal of trees 

or other vegetation

Summit of Big Glassy

Elevation: 2740 ft.

Connemara Lifestyle Alternative

Prescriptive Management Zones 

North

Note: Scale is approximate 

Historic Discovery

Historic Interaction

Tree line

Buildings

Rock outcrops

Fence lines

Walking trails

Park boundary

Visitor Services

Park Services

a Preferred Amphitheater Relocation Site

FEET

0 250 500

Map Symbols

Main 

House

Area

Farm

Mgr's

House

US Hwy 25

Park Headquarters 

and Maintenance Area

Volunteer

Parking Area

Barn

Area

Comfort

Station

Side Pastures

Village of Flat Rock

Existing 

Amphitheater

Visitor Entrance and Parking

Little River Road

Visitor Information Station

Carl Sandburg 

Home NHS

Boundary Expansion Inset 

Area of Expansion

Note:

Shaded area = 22 acres

1-2 acre administative

boundary authorization

for parking not shown

3 acre administative

boundary authorization

for Big Glassy summit

not shown

Figure 2-j. Connemara Lifestyle Prescriptive Management Zones

 Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

58

Prescriptive Management Zones

Figure 2-j shows the arrangement of PMZs for the Connemara

Lifestyle Alternative. Approximate distribution of PMZs for the

alternative is:

226 acres (85%) - Historic Discovery Zone

25 acres (10%) - Historic Interaction Zone

1 acre (~.5%) - Amphitheater Relocation Zone

8 acres (3%) - Visitor Services Zone

4 acres (1.5%) - Park Services Zone

Preserving the historic character of the park in a manner that

looks and feels authentic to the period of significance is a very

important aspect of this alternative. To reinforce this goal,

approximately 85% of the park is placed in the historic

discovery zone where fewer non-period of significance

changes are permitted. All woodland trails, including the Big

Glassy National Recreation Trail, appear as they did during the

Sandburg residency.

A visitor services zone of approximately 8 acres is placed in the

northeast corner of the park to accommodate the existing

parking area, the non-historic loop trail around Front Lake,

and an expanded visitor contact station.

A 4 acre park services zone is located the northwest corner of

the park to accommodate the existing administrative and

maintenance facilities and the consolidation of relocated park

service operations from the historic interaction zone.

Phased Implementation

A phased implementation strategy for the Connemara Lifestyle

alternative is recommended. While it is recognized that

unforeseen opportunities or obstacles may necessitate

deviation from the suggested plan, the plan does provide a

general implementation strategy and timetable for use in

comparing the alternatives.

Phased implementation would occur over four five-year

phases.

Phase I: 1 to 5 years

Phase 1 concentrates on addressing the park’s immediate

needs while beginning the information gathering and

implementation planning processes that will eventually

address more complex issues. Important accomplishments of

Phase 1 are:

boundary expansion legislation

development concept plan for visitor parking area

protect the 25 acre adjacent property by easement or fee

simple purchase

Phase 2: 5 to 10 years

The focus of phase 2 is to provide additional visitor service

infrastructure and begin planning for visitor contact station

expansion. Important accomplishments of Phase 2 are::

construct additional parking spaces in visitor parking area

design and construction of new structure to replace

trailer restroom

planning and implementation of web site and associated

information database. Web site development, data

collection, and processing begins.

Phase 3: 10 to 15 years

The focus of phase 3 is to implement visitor contact station

expansion.

design and construction of visitor contact station

expansion

relocate amphitheater

Phase 4: 15 years to 20 years and beyond

The focus of phase 4 is to consolidate efforts of previous

phases and work towards complete implementation of the

alternative by:

evaluate progress and revise strategies for complete

implementation of alternative if necessary

Cost Estimate

Figure 2-k presents a rough estimate of the implementation

and long term operating and maintenance costs associated

with the alternative.

Cost associated with protecting the 25 acre boundary

expansion is indicated as a range and not incorporated into

the total figures because the protection measure employed

may be through easement or fee simple purchase.

In general, costs were developed using conceptual-type (class

“C”) estimates for Fiscal Year 2001. These costs include

allowances for design, project supervision, installation/

construction, and contingencies. More detailed and accurate

cost estimates would need to be developed when the park is

closer to implementing individual actions.

The costs shown are provided as an aid for comparing the

alternatives and should not be used for budgetary purposes.

 Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

59

 Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 

Implementation

Action

Annual 

Cost

Estimated 

Development 

Cost

Additional trail amenities 

Comfort station 

Amphitheater relocation and site restoration 

Visitor information station renovation 

Visitor parking area expansion 

Staffing 

$ 43,000

$ 75,000

$ 55,000

$ 383,000

$ 56,000

$ 622,000

$ 160,000

$ 8,000

$ 3,000

$ 1,000

$ 1,000

$ 1,000

$ 1,000

$ 175,000 

CL_CostTable.eps

Total 

Protection of properties located in 

boundary expansion 

Volunteer parking area expansion $ 10,000

$ 7,000 to 

$ 450,000 0 to $10,000

Figure 2-k. Connemara Lifestyle Cost Estimate
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

60

No Action Alternative

Concept Description

For analysis purposes, a no-action alternative is described in

the plan. The no-action alternative serves as a base line

measurement for comparing the resource conditions and

visitor experiences prescribed by the three alternative

management concepts. The conditions and trends listed below

would be maintained in the no-action alternative.

The park is expected to be funded and staffed at a level

comparable to current conditions. Park management

continues to be an active, responsible, and contributing

member of the local community.

Current parking area remains the same size and while the

shared parking agreement with Flat Rock Playhouse

continues in effect, availability of open spaces in the

playhouse lot lessens as their performance schedule

grows. The number of parking spaces in the existing

parking area is slightly increased by restriping, however

the number of additional spaces realized from this effort

does not satisfy peak demand.

Amphitheater remains in its present location near the

main house. Facility is maintained but not improved or

enlarged.

Trailer restroom continues to serve visitors in its present

condition and location. Facility is maintained but not

improved or enlarged.

High quality interpretive tours and programs continue to

be provided at main house area, amphitheater, barn area,

and in local schools.

Historic artifacts and archival materials continue to be

professionally cared for and preserved in the museum

preservation center. Museum objects are exhibited at

main house and in some historic structures.

Existing trails are maintained and managed in current

conditions. Granite rock domes are protected from

excessive recreational use.

A detailed description of existing conditions is presented in

Chapter 3, Affected Environment.

Prescriptive Management Zones

Prescriptive management zones are not used in the no-action

alternative. Park management continues to be guided by the

1971 master plan, 1977 development concept plan, and 1996

amendment to master plan. Figure 2-l shows existing

conditions at the park.

Needed or Allowable Changes

The no-action alternative describes a future condition which

might reasonably result from the continuation of current

management policies. As such, new programs, activities, or

developments that cause significant change are not considered

in this alternative.

Cost Estimate

No additional costs are associated with the no-action

alternative because it does not propose significant changes

over existing conditions.

 No Action Alternative 
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

61

No Action Alternative

Main 

House

Area

noactionmap.eps

Front Lake

Side Lake

US Hwy 25

Park Headquarters 

and Maintenance Area

Summit of Big Glassy

Elevation: 2740 ft.

Volunteer

Parking Area

Barn

Area

Comfort

Station

Front Pasture

Side Pastures

Village of Flat Rock

Existing 

Amphitheater

Visitor Entrance and Parking

North

Note: Scale is approximate 

Tree line

Buildings

Rock outcrops

Fence lines

Walking trails

Park boundary

FEET

0 250 500

Map Symbols

Little River Road

Visitor Information Station

Farm

Mgr's

House

Figure 2-l. Existing Conditions / No-Action Alternative

 No Action Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

62

Comparison by Major Decision Points

Figure 2-m summarizes the differences between alternatives by

contrasting the approach and degree to which each addresses

the Major Decision Points developed in Chapter I.

Comparison by Alternative Highlights

Figure 2-n summarizes the differences between alternatives by

contrasting their major features and highlights.

Assessment Process and Selection of

Preferred Alternative

The term “factor” as defined in this plan is a category of

environmental conditions used to describe potential

environmental impacts. Factors were identified by the

planning team through an in-depth review of the comments

and concerns expressed during scoping.

Guided by policy and public input, the planning team

established criteria representing the most preferred condition

for each factor. A minimum criterion was established when

appropriate and generally reflects the minimum standard

established by Federal Law or NPS policy. Criteria for each

factor are detailed in Chapter 4, Environmental Consequences.

The alternatives were then assessed for their ability to achieve

the preferred condition in each factor. Alternatives were not

required to fully achieve the most preferred condition in every

factor to be considered viable. Each alternative was, however,

required to meet the minimum criterion for every factor in

order to be considered viable.

Scale of Assessment:

The following scale was used to assess the ability of each

alternative to achieve the most preferred condition for each

factor.

Exceptional – results of implementing the alternative

clearly meet and exceed the high criteria. An assessment

of exceptional is the most desirable assessment and

indicates that implementing the alternative would most

likely result in a highly desirable, unique, or beneficial

environmental condition readily noticed by visitors.

Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a positive

assessment indicating that implementing the alternative

would result in conditions which generally satisfy the high

criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would not be

noticed by most visitors.

Minor – results of implementing the alternative do not

satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well

short of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is

a neutral assessment acknowledging a less than optimum

environmental condition that can be successfully

managed to minimize its impact on visitor experience or

resource protection goals.

Negligible – results of implementing the alternative are

notably less than the preferred condition but still exceed

minimum criteria for the factor and do not cause resource

impairment. An assessment of negligible generally

indicates some visitors may perceive an environmental

condition associated with implementation of the

alternative as a distraction, inconvenience, or unfulfilled

desire.

Selection of a preferred alternative was accomplished using a

Choosing by Advantages (CBA) value analysis - a decision

making process based on the advantages of different

alternatives for a variety of factors.

In this plan, advantages were determined by measuring the

difference between assessments for each factor among the

alternatives. A most important advantage was selected from the

compiled list of advantages and assigned a score of 100. The

remaining advantages were then given importance values

relative to the most important advantage and totals were

compiled for each alternative.

Individual assessments for each factor and alternative are

documented in Chapter 4, Environmental Consequences. A

summary the factors and importance values used in the

analysis is shown in Figure 2-o. It should be noted that the

importance values shown for each alternative represent the

specific advantages of one alternative over another relative to

a single factor. Importance values in the figure are not

intended to imply that one factor is more important than

another.

Selection of Environmentally Preferred

Alternative

The environmentally preferred alternative is the alternative that

best promotes the national environmental policy as expressed

in NEPA; is determined to cause the least damage to the

biological and physical environment; and best protects,

preserves, and enhances the historic, cultural, and natural

resources of the park. Based on the CBA process, which

incorporated the most important environmental impact issues

into its assessment and analysis, the Sandburg Center

alternative is considered to be the environmentally preferred

alternative because it achieved the highest total importance

value.

Summary and Comparison

 Summary and Comparison 
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

63

Major 

Decision 

Points

Paths 

of Discovery

Alternative

Sandburg 

Center

Alternative

Connemara

Life-style

Alternative N

New trails not constructed in Historic Discovery or Historic Interaction Zone. 

Unofficial access points are closed. 

Partner relationships continue to be an important park and community asset 

Walking anloosely inteoverall park program. User conflica managem

Primary emphasis is placed on increasing interpretation and other opportunities that educate visitors about the life and works of Sandburg. Walking and hiking considered an important but secondary method of delivering the interpretive message to visitors.

Visitors arrive and enter the park through the main entrance only. The off-site visitor center provides an additional contact point but visitors still enter the NHS through the main gate.

Visitors arrive and enter the park through the main entrance or a secondary pedestrian access point at the back gate. The off-site visitor center provides an additional contact point but visitors still enter the NHS through the main entrance or the secondary pedestrian access point.

Walking and hiking is an 

important vehicle for exposing 

park visitors to the Sandburg 

Story.

Visitor Services Zone expanded 

to accommodate a sensitively 

designed interpretive 

connector trail that increases 

walking and hiking 

opportunities within the park.

Primary emphasis is placed on maintaining the historic scene and character of the park. Opportunities for walking and hiking are closely monitored and use regulated to limit visual impact on the historic scene. 

1. To what degree should the need or demand for recreation activity be accommodated at the park?

 2. Is visitor use better controlled using single or multiple access points?

3. To what degree can or should the park rely on Public/Private partnerships to procure the necessary resources to manage the park?

4. Can the park continue to provide quality visitor services and protect cultural and natural resources of the park within the existing boundary of the park? Is a boundary expansion needed, and if so, how much and for what purpose?

5. How extensive a role should the park play in interpreting the Sandburg legacy to people beyond the boundary of the park?

Opportunities for walking and hiking provided. Recreational activities that compromise the hist. integrity of the 

Visitors arrive and enter the park through the main entrance only. 

Success of alternative is moderately dependent on the Park's ability to establish and maintain strong partnerships. 

Park reaches out to a national, if not world-wide, audience. 

Park reaches out primarily to a regional and local audience. Park reaches out primarily to a local audience. Park contin

high qualitprograms tand occasionational au

Success of alternative is dependent on a boundary expansion. Approximately 3 to 5 acres needed to accomplish the critical parking and visitor center goals of the alternative.Approximately 110 acres need additonal protection 

Success of amoderately the Park's aand maintapartnership

Success of alternative is highly dependent on the Park's ability to establish and maintain strong partnerships.

Success of alternative is slightly dependent on the Park's ability to establish and maintain strong partnerships.

Success of alternative is not significantly dependent on a boundary expansion although a boundary expansion of approximately 1 to 2 acres is recommended to accommodate an off-site parking area. Approximately 25 acres need additonal protection 

Park has remaximum aboundary aexpand to aparking anresource pr

Multiple unpoints conmanageme

Success of alternative is dependent on a boundary expansion. Approximately 3 to 5 acres needed to accomplish the critical parking and visitor center goals of the alternative.Approximately 110 acres need additonal protection 

Figure 2-m. How Alternatives Address Major Decision Points
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

64

Feature or Highlight Paths of Discovery Alternative Sandburg Center Alternative Connemara Life-style Alternative 

10 additional parking spaces created by expansion of existing visitor parking area near Front Lake (contingent on relocating bus parking).

3 to 5 acres for visitor center and 

parking area

1. Provides additional parking 2. Size of and purpose for proposed boundary expansion

Adds a 3/4 mile long interpretive 

connector trail along Little River 

Road and Back Drive between 

visitor parking area and barn area

Additional parking provided in association with visitor center at 

location outside existing boundary of park

Up to 110 acre expansion for scenic view and resource protection Up to 25 acre expansion for scenic view and resource protection 

 1 to 2 acres for 

parking area

Additional parking at 1 to 2 acre 

location outside existing 

boundary of park

No visitor center 

Visitor center not 

3. Visitor Center

Visitor center includes additional 

multiuse program areas

Additional trails permitted in visitor services zone near Front Lake

Owned and operated by NPS or in partnership with 

others at location outside existing boundary of park

4. Improved Visitor Information Station in Visitor Services Zone Existing facility renovated and expanded to provide additional on-site interpretive opportunities and improve visitor orientation 

5. Provides additional multipurpose areas for interpretation and museum programs 6. Provides additional walking trails

7. Treatment of trailer restroom near residence Replaces existing facility with sensitively designed new facility in same location 

8. Places additional interpretive waysides in historic landscape

9. Additional staff required by full implementation of alternative

Additional multiuse interpretive program areas not proposed 

Connector trail not proposed Connector trail n

Additional areas included in visitor information 

station renovation

Additional program areas provided 

at select historic structures

10. Treatment of Amphitheater Proposes new amphitheater of approximately the same size be constructed at one of three approved locations. Old site would be restored to period of significance condition. 

Additional waysides on new 

pedestrian interpretive trail 

Total number of waysides slightly 

more than existing conditions

Total number of waysides slightly 

less than existing conditions

Up to 9 positions needed over time. 

Total number may be reduced by 

using trained volunteers 

Up to 6 positions needed over time. 

Number may be reduced by using 

trained volunteers 

Up to 3 positions needed over time. 

Number may be reduced by using 

trained volunteers 

Additional interpretive waysides placed on trails near Front Lake in visitor 

services zone. Existing waysides removed from historic discovery zone

Figure 2-n. Features and Highlights of Alternatives
C h a p t e r Two  Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

65

 Summary and Comparison 

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

67

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage 54 54

74

Small 

advantage 37 Large 

advantage 82

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

50

74

90

40

ALTERNATIVES

FACTORS Sandburg Center Connemara Lifestyle

Preservation of historic building interiors

Introduction of non-contributing

elements to the historic landscape 

Opportunities for solitude or a 

contemplative experience

Provides high quality facilities to support 

a variety of interpretation 

and museum programs

Provides visitors with opportunities for 

personal contact with NPS personnel

(staff or trained volunteer) 

Provides opportunities for public access 

to museum collection and related information 

Promotes continued learning 

and research of Carl Sandburg 

Provides opportunity to link park 

themes with local, state, national 

and international education programs 

Note: A "no advantage" advantage is represented in the importance value column by a blank cell

CBA_Summary.eps

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 70 70

Small 

advantage 36

Small 

advantage 17

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

29

540 347

15

Minimizes maintenance responsibility

Provides addional parking spaces 

Enhances employee, volunteer,

and visitor safety

Enhances energy conservation

or reduces energy consumption

Provides additional opportunities

for walking 

Provides incentives for partnering

with local governments, community groups,

and individual citizens

Potential economic benefit

to local community

TOTAL RELATIVE IMPORTANCE VALUE

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

67

62

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

54

65

Paths of Discovery 

Medium

advantage 

28

70

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

36

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

44

46

15

459

Medium

advantage 

Potential to preserve existing vegetation

67

Medium

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

No

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

100

Small 

advantage 48

Existing Conditions

(No Action)

28 Small 

advantage

17

312

Small 

advantage

Medium

advantage 52

Importance

Value Advantage ImportanceValue Advantage ImportanceValue Advantage ImportanceValue Advantage

Figure 2-o. Factors, Advantages, and Importance Values of Alternatives

C h a p t e r T h r e e  Affected Environment

67

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Chapter Overview

Chapters Three (Affected Environment) and Four

(Environmental Consequences) comprise the Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS) for this Draft General Management

Plan. The descriptions, data, and analysis presented focus on the

specific conditions or consequences that may result from

implementing the alternatives. The EIS should not be considered

a comprehensive description of all aspects of the human

environment within or surrounding the park.

Chapter Three begins with a short description of how

mandatory environmental impact topics required by Council on

Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations and NPS policy are

addressed in the EIS. A description of existing environmental

conditions follows to give the reader a better understanding of

planning issues and establish a benchmark by which the

magnitude of environmental effects of the various alternatives

can be compared. For easier cross-referencing, the information

in Chapter Three is organized by the same impact groups used

to organize the impact analysis in Chapter Four.

Mandatory Environmental Impact

Topics

CEQ regulations and NPS policy require that certain

environmental impact topics be addressed in every EIS. This

draft addresses the mandatory topics in one of two ways; either

a rationale is provided for dismissing the topic from further

consideration or the topic is included in the assessment and

analysis process.

Mandatory environmental impact topics

dismissed from further analysis

The following mandatory environmental impact topics were

dismissed from further analysis:

Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority

Populations and Low Income Populations

Land values, while not excessive by national standards, are

considered relatively high locally. The relative cost of land in the

Village of Flat Rock has discouraged significant numbers of

minority and low income populations from residing in the local

area. U.S. Census model based income and poverty estimates

for Henderson County in 1997 (U.S. Census Bureau 1997)

indicate the local area has a significantly lower poverty rate

(11.4%) than the average rates for North Carolina (12.6%) or the

U.S. (13.3%). Since none of the proposed actions is expected to

reduce the availability of affordable housing or result in a

negative impact to the socioeconomic environment of the local

community, minority and low income populations, to the extent

they exist, would not be significantly affected.

Wetlands and Floodplains

This topic is intended to prevent development in 100-year

floodplains. There are no actions proposed in this plan that

would occur in or encroach upon floodplains (Henderson

County GIS 2002). With this finding, no further analysis of

floodplains is necessary.

Prime and Unique Agricultural Lands

Federal Agencies must assess the effects of their actions on soils

classified by the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service as

prime or unique farmlands. The park does not contain soils

categorized as prime or unique (Pence 1998).

Endangered or Threatened Plants and Animals and their habitats

Federal Agencies must assess the effects of their actions on

endangered or threatened plants and animals as classified by

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. No endangered or threatened

plants or animals are known to inhabit the site.

Indian Sacred Sites

Federal Agencies must assess the effects of their actions on

known Indian sacred sites. Carl Sandburg Home National

Historic Site has not been identified as a sacred site by any

federally recognized Indian Tribe or appropriately authoritative

representative of an Indian Religion. Notwithstanding the

specific purposes for which the park was established, the park

will remain prepared to comply with the Native American

CHAPTER THREE
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

68

Graves Repatriation Act in the unlikely event of inadvertent

discovery of human remains in the course of any earth

disturbing activity and make a reasonable good-faith effort to

determine any future interests of federally recognized tribes

with cultural associations to the site.

Indian Trust Resources

Federal Agencies must assess the effects of their actions on

Indian Trust Resources. Carl Sandburg Home National

Historic Site is not considered an Indian Trust Resource.

Mandatory Environmental Impact Topics

Discussed in Plan

The following mandatory topics warranted more detailed

discussion within the body of the plan and are addressed

specifically or in association with a closely related factor in the

analysis.

• Integration with local planning processes.

• Energy requirements and conservation potential.

• Natural or depletable resource requirements and

conservation potential.

• Urban quality, historic and cultural resources, and design

of the built environment.

• Important scientific, archeological, and other cultural

resources, including historic properties listed or eligible

for the National Register of Historic Places.

• Ecologically critical or natural resources unique to the

area.

• Public health and safety.

Description of Existing Conditions

The following discussion provides an understanding of

existing environmental conditions potentially affected by

implementing the alternatives.

Cultural Resource Management

Carl Sandburg Home NHS contains most of the original

Sandburg estate and is managed and preserved in its entirety

as a cultural resource of national significance. Generally, park

resources can be categorized by association with the main

house, Carl Sandburg’s literary and musical works, Mrs.

Sandburg’s dairy goat farm operation, or woodland. The core

of the main house-associated elements includes the main

house and furnishings, subsidiary buildings and their

furnishings, associated trails, and the landscape immediately

surrounding those elements. The park’s Museum Preservation

Center preserves over 330,000 museum objects and archives

associated with Carl Sandburg’s life and works. The principal

features of the farm are the barn (which includes facilities for

milking goats), farm manager’s house, barn garage, an

equipment storage building, furnishings associated with those

structures and pasture land. A representative number of each

of three breeds of dairy goats owned by the Sandburgs is

maintained on the farm as an interpretive tool. Approximately

75% of the park area is covered by a mixed pine and

hardwood forest.

Museum Collection

The museum collection contains significant cultural resources

of the park and consists primarily of Sandburg’s furnishings,

library, farm implements, personal belongings, photographs,

and archival materials. The museum collection is cared for at

a 4,000 SF Museum Preservation Center. The museum

preservation center provides climate controlled storage and

work areas for preservation operations. Researchers are

currently accommodated at the museum preservation center,

however, its size does not allow more than one or two persons

to work with the collection at a single time.

Original historic objects are exhibited at the main house

(household, library, and archival objects), woodshed (farm

equipment), barn garage (farm vehicles), and shaving shed

(farm equipment). Some historic objects are exposed to

potentially damaging changes in humidity, temperature, and

light at all of these locations. Continued exposure of some

objects to uncontrolled climatic environments will result in

deterioration over time (Van Beck 2000).

Historic Structures

There are over 50 historic structures located within the park.

Many of them were used from the Memminger period through

the Sandburg’s ownership of the estate.

Most historic building exteriors have been preserved or

restored to the period of significance and function as

important exterior exhibits for the interpretive program of the

park. Historic building interiors serve a variety of

preservation, interpretation, and administrative functions.

Some interiors have been completely preserved or restored,

some rehabilitated for alternate uses, and others merely

stabilized. An overview of selected historic building interiors

in the main house and barn areas is shown in Figures 3-a and

3-b.

Historic Landscape

The historic landscape has been managed to minimize

intrusions by non-historic elements since 1974. On the whole,

management efforts have been very successful and public

comments during scoping indicate a strong connection

between the integrity of the historic landscape and visitor

enjoyment of the site.

 Mandatory Impact Topics 
C h a p t e r T h r e e  A f f e c t e d E n v i r o n m e n t

69

The landscape of the park is, of course, not entirely free of

non-historic objects. Over the years, contemporary elements

have been added to accommodate the visiting public and

provide facilities for managing and maintaining the park. The

following contemporary elements are present in the historic

landscape at this time:

• Since 1974, the park has provided a shuttle vehicle to

transport persons who need assistance up the steep slope

from the visitors parking area to the main house area. The

current vehicle is a 1996 model gasoline-powered 12

passenger bus. The shuttle operates on demand year

around and on a regular schedule during the peak

visitation period from May through August and again in

October.

• A 12’x 30’ trailer comfort station was added near the main

house in 1974. This comfort station was originally

considered a temporary structure but has continued in

service at the same location since its installation.

• The public entrance on Little River Road was enhanced in

1982 and contains a 32 space asphalt parking lot, a 500 SF

visitor information and comfort station, a concrete walk

and ramp system to connect them, and a non-historic

natural surface walking trail around Front Lake. There are

currently 4 picnic tables located between the visitor

information station and Little River Road.

• In 1985, a 3,000 SF maintenance facility was adapted in the

northwest corner of the park. A 4,000 SF Museum

Preservation Center was constructed in 1995 and a 2,000

SF headquarters building in 1996 at the same location.

• A 2,000 SF gravel parking area was constructed in a

disturbed area approximately 75 yards from the barn in

1997 to allow volunteer workers more convenient and safe

access to the main house and barn areas where they

typically work.

• An outdoor amphitheater was constructed on a moderate

slope 25 yards from the northeast corner of the main

house in 1980. The facility covers approximately 5,000 SF

and includes bench seating for 75 persons.

• Eight trail side benches and several trash cans have been

installed throughout the park over time for visitor

convenience.

• Six outdoor interpretive waysides were strategically

located throughout the park in 2001.

Interpretation and Museum Operations

Interpretation and museum programs help visitors learn about

the importance of Carl Sandburg’s life and works. Formal

programs are typically ranger or volunteer guided and occur

most often at the main house, main house garage, barn, and

amphitheater areas. Informal opportunities occur on a limited

basis throughout the park.

Public scoping comments indicate that most visitors

enthusiastically support interpretive programming, have a

strong desire for additional opportunities to learn about the

Sandburgs and their lifestyle, and would like additional

opportunity to access information contained in the museum

collection. Figure 3-c provides a profile of the two types of

visitors who generally use park facilities.

Facilities capable of supporting interpretation or museum

programs

Opportunities for dynamic and interactive interpretive

experiences occur at the main house, amphitheater, and barn

areas on a regular basis. The main house is furnished with

museum objects and materials and provides opportunities for

visitors to view a significant component of the museum

collection and learn how the Sandburgs lived and used their

home. Many of Sandburg’s personal possessions, clothes,

awards, and family photographs are located in the museum

preservation center. The amphitheater and house garage area

currently provide opportunities for performance or lecturetype interpretive experiences.

Visitors may view additional historic objects at the barn

garage, woodshed, milk house, and shaving shed. The house

garage and the bookstore area in the main house basement are

capable of accommodating a traditional indoor classroom

type educational experience. Informal indoor learning

experiences can occur at the horse barn. Outdoor educational

experiences occur park wide when the weather is mild.

Opportunities for solitude or a contemplative experience

Opportunities for visitors to experience solitude or have a

contemplative experience are available most often during

periods of low visitation (November though April and in

September - see figure 3-c) and in areas of the park located

away from the parking lot, main house, and barn area. At

present, such experiences are common along the wooded

trails, at Big Glassy overlook, and in the pasture areas year

around except during the highest of peak visitation days. The

activity of walking for exercise is becoming increasingly

popular with local visitors and tends to reduce opportunities

for solitude and contemplation by increasing the frequency of

visitor presence near the main house and barn areas and on

the trail to Big Glassy overlook.

Public contact with NPS personnel (staff or trained volunteers)

The park currently provides high quality on-site personal

interpretation to visitors primarily at the main house and barn

area locations. A well developed and expanding school based

 Existing Conditions 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

70

Existing Use

and Condition

of Interior Spaces

Square

Feet Building

Sandburg Residence 6000

750560480650120720500

Poor - non historic changes inappropriate for main floor and second floor 

Good - in rehabilitated portion of basement 

Poor - non historic additions inappropriate for main floor and second floor 

Good - for inclusion in rehabilitated portion of basement 

Good - cmostly o

Restored and furnished to period of significance. Open to public for guided interpretive tours. About 75% of basement rehabilitated for use as bookstore and admin. area 

Swedish House

Good - main floor but small space would limit size of classroom. 

Poor - access is difficult to second floor 

Good - on main floor 

Poor - on second floor due to limited access by small stairs

Good 

Good 

Fair - very small space limits number of people who could see at one time

Fair - vepeople w

Good - cfurnishi

Good 

Restored to period of significance. Unfurnished and open to public for self-guided interpretive tours. No public access permitted to second floor 

Rehabilitated - Closed to public. Currently use as office space

Preserved - Closed to public.

Preserved - Closed to public. 

Preserved - Open for public viewing. Open shed, used to display farm equipment

Preserved - Closed to public. Interior empty 

Good - somewhat small size but good potential for small groups

Good - somewhat limited by small size 

Fair - small space could limit potential usefulness

Poor - not an enclosed space

Poor - very small space

Good 

Good

Tenant House

Main House Area Chicken House

Wood Shed

Spring House

House Garage Good - space already rehabilitated and utilities in place. Good - space already rehabilitated and utilities in place. Fair - bu

serve as 

Rehabilitated - Open to public. Important classroom and program staging area

Greenhouse

Sandburg Residence

Swedish House

Tenant House

Main House Area Chicken House

Wood Shed

Spring House

House Garage

Greenhouse

Fair - use limited by small size Good Good - i

docume

1 2

3

4 5 6

7

8

12345678

Building Key

Building Locations

Potential for alternate use of interior 

Incorporation of

Interpretive media

displays**

For re

o

appro

Can support a variety of 

interpretation programs

A recommended treatment strategy is recommended for any building interio

No historic building except the main hsuitable for the display of sensitive mhistoric objects appropriate for the exconditions within a given structure wofor placement within them. 

Notes:

*

**

Figure 3-a. Main House Area Building 
C h a p t e r T h r e e  A f f e c t e d E n v i r o n m e n t

71

Poor - historic character would be compromised

Poor - historic character would be compromised

Poor - historic character would be compromised

Fair - would require some rehabilitation of interior spaces and relocation of historic furnishings

Fair - would require some rehabilitation of interior spaces and relocating of historic furnishings

Good - period f

Good - cperiod f

Fair - small size limits access to interior spaces Poor - too small 

Good - large space but rehabilitation 

could be expensive 

Fair - would require significant 

rehabilitation of interior space

Poor - very small Poor - very small

Good - interior spaces already rehabilitated - utilities in place Good Good Rehabilitated - Closed to public. Used as park residence Farm Manager's House 1925

10253520

945

1000

210144738500

Good - wof inter

Good 

Buck House Preserved - Closed to public. Used for storage of park materials. 

Main Barn 

Barn Garage

Restored and functioning as base of goat operation. Open to public. Popular destination for visitors. Restored and furnished to period of significance. Open to public. 

Poor - non historic changes inappropriate for this location

Poor - non historic changes inappropriate for this location Good - c

period f

Milk House Preserved and furnished to period of significance. Open to public. Popular destination for visitors. 

Poor - open barn interior is good for informal group activities but historic character would be compromised by rehabilitation as a multi use interpretive space

Horse Barn

Restored. Open to public. Occasionally used as informal interpretive area.

Good 

Good 

Buck Kid Quarters

Preserved - 50% used for goats50% used for farm related storage

Barn Area Chicken House

Shaving Shed

Preserved - used for chickens

Potential for alternate use of interior 

Existing Use

and Condition

of Interior Spaces

Square

Feet Building

Farm Manager's ResidenceBuck HouseBarn Area Chicken HouseShaving ShedMilk HouseHorse BarnBuck-Kid HouseMain Barn

5

5

1

2

3

4

8

7

6

9

123456789 Barn Garage

Building Key

Good - cfurnishi

Preserved - Farm equipment displayed inside. Storage of wood shavings for barn exhibit 

Poor - historic character would be compromised by enclosing 

Fair

Building Locations

 Can support a variety of

interpretation programs

Incorporation of

Interpretive media

displays**

For res

or 

approp

A recommended treatment strategy is not recommended for any building interior by 

No historic building except the main houssuitable for the display of sensitive museuhistoric objects appropriate for the existinconditions within a given structure would for placement within them. 

Notes:

*

**

Figure 3-b. Barn Area Building Interio
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

72

Monthly Distribution of Visitor Who Participate in Interpretive Programs

 August 1998 to July 2000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Month

Number of Visits

'99 - '00

'98 - '99

Vistable.eps

Note: The above figres are intended to 

illustrate visitation trends rather than total 

visitation. An estimated 100,000 additonal 

visitor days per year occur in similar 

monthly distribution by persons who visit 

the park but choose not to participate in formal 

interpretation programs.

Two types of visitors generally use park facilities - non-local visitors and local visitors. Non-local visitors are

typically interested in touring the residence and barn area or attending one of the many special event activities.

Local visitors appear to be Henderson County residents that use the trails for a walking experience. Local

visitors are distinguished by early morning arrival times, low vehicle occupancy, athletic attire, the absence of

children, the presence of dogs, and familiarity with other visitors with whom they did not arrive or depart. A few

local residents walk to the site. Non-local visitors are distinguished by late morning or afternoon arrival times,

high vehicle occupancy, casual (nonathletic) attire, the presence of children, and unfamiliarity with park

facilities.

Between January 1999 and December 1999, the National Park Service recorded over 50,000 visitors who

participated in ranger or volunteer led interpretive programs. This estimate does not include local visitors using

the trail system within the park. Based on field observations in July 2000, the number of local visitors appears

to be significant, especially during the early morning hours. While no formal data has been collected on the

actual number of local visitors, unofficial estimates based on staff observations suggest that the number could

exceed 100,000 visitor days per year.

The above graph illustrates the seasonal trends in visitation at the park by graphing monthly data for visitors who

participated in interpretive programs from August 1998 to July 2000. Typically, the lowest average monthly

visitation occurs in January. The number of visitors increases steadily through early spring, then falls slightly in

May. The summer season runs from mid-May through August peaking in July. The fall foliage season brings the

greatest number of monthly visitors to the Carl Sandburg Home NHS in October of each year. The minor

variation between data for the two years in the analysis is attributed to fluctuations in weather conditions (NPS

2000)

Figure 3-c. Profile of Visitors and Visitation

 Mandatory Impact Topics 
C h a p t e r T h r e e  A f f e c t e d E n v i r o n m e n t

73

education program provides personal contact opportunities

with students in local schools.

Research of Carl Sandburg

Visitors are encouraged to learn more about Carl Sandburg

through high quality on-site interpretation. Off-site

interpretation occurs by providing educational programs in

local schools. Opportunities to expand continued learning

and research activities to a larger audience is limited by the

difficulty of accommodating large groups of students or

researchers for extended periods of time.

The park’s archival collection is becoming more intellectually

accessible and more widely known. Requests from researchers

to use materials will likely increase over time (Van Beck 2000).

Outside research is supported to the extent possible by the

existing curatorial and interpretation staff.

Local, state, national, and international education programs

Park education programs are conducted primarily on site.

Park themes are successfully integrated into local education

programs directly by park staff with assistance from area

educators.

Teacher workshops are conducted on-site and focus on park

resources. Curriculum materials are developed by park staff

and local educators.

Natural Resources

The historic landscape of the park is managed primarily as a

cultural resource in which natural resource components play

an integral role.

The topography of the park is relatively steep and rugged

particularly in the Big Glassy - Little Glassy area where slopes

sometimes exceed 65 percent. Slopes throughout the

remainder of the park vary between 5 percent and 20 percent.

Small streams originating on Big Glassy and Little Glassy run

through the park and are dammed at several locations to form

the small Trout Pond and Duck Pond and the larger Front and

Side Lakes. Beyond these artificial lakes, the streams unite to

form Memminger Creek which exits the park through a culvert

under Little River Road.

Wildlife at the park is restricted to mammals, fish, birds,

amphibians, and reptiles native to western North Carolina.

Mammals commonly seen in the park include chipmunks, gray

squirrels, raccoons, foxes, and deer. Bobcats and bears have

been sighted on rare occasions. Fish located in the Side and

Front lakes include bass and several varieties of sunfish. The

most common birds in the area include blue jays, crows,

robins, and several varieties of common songbirds.

Amphibians include frogs, toads, and several varieties of

salamanders. Reptiles common to the park include snapping

turtles, terrapins, several varieties of lizards, and many kinds of

snakes. There are no federal or state listed threatened or

endangered species present.

The park contains several low elevation granite rock domes

that support a vegetation association that is fairly common in

the local area but very rare globally (White, 2002). There are

more than nine large patches of this association within the

boundaries of the park, some of which are very high quality

examples of this plant community.

While significant change to the natural environment is not

anticipated in any alternative, the planning team wanted to

account for the potential impacts on vegetation resulting from

the proposed additional visitor service infrastructure in the

alternatives. The following factor describes the existing

condition of vegetation at the park.

Existing vegetation

The natural environment of the park is principally a

combination of woodland and pasture. Approximately 200

acres of the park is covered by mixed pine and hardwood

forest, 38 acres in fenced pasture land, 8.5 acres in ponds, and

the remainder in park/residential style landscapes. Figure 3-d

shows the general vegetative cover as it exists in the park today.

Minor vegetation removal associated with normal

maintenance activities occurs on a regular basis. Typically

such actions involve the mowing of lawn and pasture areas,

trimming of individual trees to promote or improve plant

health, removal of hazardous limbs and branches for safety

Figure 3-d. Aerial view of vegetative cover

 Existing Conditions 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

74

reasons, removal of invasive species, and removal of dead or

diseased vegetation. Storm damaged vegetation is generally

removed after periodic weather events involving high winds,

excessive snow, or ice.

Park Operations and Administration

Factors in this category describe the existing conditions

related to park operations and administration potentially

impacted by implementation of the alternatives. It is important

to note that formal position need assessments have not been

conducted for most park divisions and that the discussion of

current staffing levels is meant to document current conditions

rather than contemporary needs in this discussion.

Personnel

Administration and support services personnel provide

supervisory management and/or administrative support for

park personnel and activities. Staff includes:

1 - Full Time (FT) park superintendent/manager

1 - FT administrative officer

1 - FT administrative assistant

Maintenance staff is well trained and equipped and capable of

executing all of the maintenance responsibilities associated

with the park. Current staffing levels include:

1 - FT chief of maintenance

1 - STF (subject to furlough) custodial employee

1 - STF track operator

1 - FT electrician

1 - FT maintenance mechanic

1 - FT seasonal gardener

Volunteer labor helps fulfill maintenance responsibilities by

assisting with a variety of functions and services. Volunteers

donate approximately 500 hours per year tending the flower

and vegetable gardens and performing trail work and other

maintenance related duties.

A cooperative agreement between the park and a local farmer

provides pasture mowing services for 35 acres twice per year.

The farmer receives the excess hay generated by the mowing

operation in exchange for the service.

Resources management personnel perform a wide variety of

administrative and technical functions related to preserving,

maintaining, and monitoring cultural and natural resources at

the park. NEPA and Section 106 compliance, safety

management, law enforcement, natural and cultural resource

inventory and monitoring, and museum/curatorial operations

are responsibilities of the resources management staff. Current

staffing levels are:

1 - FT Chief of Resources Management

1- STF Curator

1 - Temporary (Temp) forestry technician

1 - Temporary archival technician

1 - FT Seasonal museum technician

There is no full time NPS law enforcement presence at the

park. One STF ranger/interpretation position is currently

vacant due to lack of funding. A Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU) with Blue Ridge Parkway provides an

NPS law enforcement ranger for a period of 60 days each

summer.

Volunteers contribute approximately 1600 hours per year to

help manage and preserve the museum collection and

archives.

Visitor services personnel provide a full range of quality visitor

interpretation and education services to people on and off site.

Current staffing levels are:

1 - FT chief of visitor services

1 - FT park ranger - interpretation/education

1 - PT park ranger - interpretation/education

1 - STF education program coordinator

6 - Temp park guides

Volunteers make a significant contribution to the interpretive

and educational program efforts of the park by donating more

than 10,000 hours of labor per year.

Parking spaces

Entrance to the visitors’ parking area is in the northeast corner

of the park on Little River Road. The parking area uses a oneway circulation pattern and vehicles enter from the eastern

driveway and exit at the western driveway. The visitor parking

area contains 32 spaces.

Signs located in parking area direct visitors to the visitor

information station. Trail access to the main house and barn

areas begin at the visitor information station. A telephone call

box is located near the west end of the parking lot and at the

visitor information station which allows visitors to request

shuttle bus service to the main house area. Shuttle bus service

is available on demand year round and operates on a regular

30 minute schedule during the peak visiting times of mid-May

through August and October. Pedestrian access to the visitor

information station is via a sloped concrete walkway that does

not meet ADA standards

 Mandatory Impact Topics 
C h a p t e r T h r e e  A f f e c t e d E n v i r o n m e n t

75

In addition to the 32 parking spaces in the visitor parking area,

an MOU with the Flat Rock Playhouse provides overflow

parking capacity which allows visitors who cannot find a space

in the visitors’ parking area to use the playhouse lot when

performances are not scheduled. The agreement also allows

playhouse patrons to use the visitors’ parking area after 5:00

PM. The Playhouse lot is located approximately 50 feet from

the visitors’ parking area and provides access to about 15-20

additional parking spaces.

The MOU for shared parking has been in place for 20 years.

Over the years, however, the Playhouse has become quite

popular and expanded its performance schedule to include

both matinee and evening performances throughout the week.

This enhanced schedule has significantly reduced the

availability of the Playhouse parking area for use by park

visitors during peak usage times.

Currently the Flat Rock Playhouse is developing long range

plans for the expansion and enhancement of their facility.

These plans may consider acquisition of additional property

adjacent to their current site that might be used for

supplemental parking. Plans for expanded parking at the

Playhouse are preliminary and would be initiated at least 5-10

years in the future.

There is an additional 14 space paved parking lot located at the

park headquarters and maintenance facility and a 10 space

gravel parking area reserved for volunteers located

approximately 75 yards from the barn area. Access to these

lots is gained through the one lane historic back drive entrance

off of Little River Road and use is restricted to NPS employees

and NHS volunteers. Visitors are not authorized to park at the

park headquarters or maintenance facility or in the volunteers

parking area without special permission from the

Superintendent to ensure safe passage.

The 1971 Master Plan (NPS 1971) recommended 70 parking

spaces to accommodate visitor, employee, volunteer, and bus

parking needs. Approximately 56 spaces currently exist on

site.

Employee, volunteer, and visitor health and safety

The overall park environment is safe and healthy for

employees, volunteers, and visitors. However, two conditions

exist where safety is a concern:

Visitor parking area: During periods when the visitor parking

area is full and overflow parking is not available at the Flat

Rock Playhouse, visitors often leave their vehicles along the

shoulder of Little River Road. Parking on the shoulder of

Little River Road does not violate any traffic ordinance and

occurs on almost a daily basis. When several cars are parked

in this manner, visibility is partially reduced for other drivers

and pedestrians trying to cross the street. The situation does

add significantly to traffic congestion at the park entrance and

increases the potential for accidents. A 100’ long serpentine

concrete walkway with a continuous slope of 10 - 15%

connects the visitor’s parking area to the visitor information

station. The sloped concrete walkway does not meet ADA

standards and is a potential safety risk for people with a variety

of disabilities.

Back drive traffic: Pedestrians, volunteer-owned vehicles, and

park vehicles simultaneously use the gravelled one-lane back

drive. A regular two way flow of pedestrians and vehicles

moves simultaneously between the headquarters and

maintenance buildings and the volunteer parking area for most

of the day. Currently, low vehicle speeds, safety training, and

observant employees lower the potential for accidents.

Energy conservation

Current levels of energy consumption are not considered

excessive. There are two areas where energy conservation

could be enhanced.

Traffic congestion: The chronic parking shortage causes traffic

congestion at the entrance to the visitors parking area. When

all parking spaces are occupied, vehicles circle continuously in

and out of the lot waiting for an available space. After several

trips through the lot, visitors either give up and leave or park

on the shoulder of Little River Road. The continual

circulation and on-shoulder parking activity causes through

traffic on Little River Road to slow and back up. Congestion is

especially intense when patrons of the Flat Rock Playhouse are

arriving or departing a performance at the same time. While

potential improvements resulting from a proposed parking

expansion at the Flat Rock Playhouse exist, the overall traffic

pattern and vehicle density at the visitor parking area is

expected to worsen as local population increases.

Alternative transportation: Local pedestrian access to the park

will be improved by a paved greenway connection to the

Village of Flat Rock. The first phase of the project has been

constructed. Satellite parking nodes are not being constructed

in the current development phase. If the greenway is

constructed without parking nodes, there is some potential for

additional use pressure on the visitors parking area by persons

wishing to leave their vehicle in the NPS lot and walk on the

greenway outside the park.

The feasibility of providing some form of public transportation

between Hendersonville and the park has been considered but

the probability of implementing such a system is uncertain at

this time.

 Existing Conditions 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

76

Quality of Life and Socioeconomic

Environment

Population in the Henderson County, North Carolina area has

increased at a steady rate for over 20 years. U.S. Census Bureau

statistics (U.S. Census Bureau 2000a) indicate approximately

28% growth between 1990 (64,204 residents) and 2000 (89,173

residents). The Greater Hendersonville Chamber of

Commerce (Hendersonville Chamber of Commerce 2000)

estimates county population will rise to 93,000 by 2010 and to

97,500 by 2015.

U.S. Census Bureau figures (U.S. Census Bureau 2000b)

indicate the racial composition of the population is

approximately 93.4% white, 3.3% black, .1% Asian or Pacific

Islander, .7% American Indian or Aleut, and 2.8% other.

Approximately 5.5% of county residents identify themselves as

Hispanic (may be of any race). Age distribution for people

living in Henderson County is approximately 22.7% age 0 to 19

years, 44% age 20 to 55 years, and 33.3% over age 55 years.

In 1999, Henderson County had a per capita personal income

(PCPI) of $27,782. This PCPI ranked 13th in the state, and was

105% of the state average, $26,417, and 97% of the national

average $28,546. The 1999 PCPI reflected an increase of 5%

from 1998. The 1998-99 state change was 3.8% and the

national change was 4.4% (U.S. Department of Commerce

2002)

In 1999, Henderson County had a total personal income (TPI)

of $2,285,499,000. This TPI ranked 22nd in the state and

accounted for 1.1% of the state total. The 1999 TPI reflected an

increase of 6.4% from 1998. The 1998-99 state change was

5.2% and the national change was 5.4%. (U.S. Department of

Commerce 2002)

Based on 1997 U.S. Census Bureau model-based estimates (U.S.

Census Bureau 2000c), approximately 11.4% of persons of all

ages in the county are classified as living below poverty level.

This figure is lower than State (12.6%) and National (13.3%)

averages for the same period.

Earnings by persons employed in Henderson County

increased from $1,165,404,000 in 1998 to $1,275,150,000 in

1999, an increase of 9.4%. The largest industries in 1999 were

services with 22.1% of earnings; durable goods manufacturing,

16.8%; and state and local government, 11.1%. Of industries

that accounted for at least 5% of earnings in 1999, the slowest

growing from 1998-99 was nondurable goods manufacturing

(9.3% of earnings in 1999), which increased 3.2; the fastest was

transportation and public utilities (5% of earnings in 1999),

which increased 22.9% (U.S. Department of Commerce 2002).

A significant health care industry has developed to serve the

large number of retired people who reside in the community.

Many jobs in the local area support a growing tourism

industry. Retail trade, accommodation and food service, arts,

entertainment, and recreation establishments all contribute

significantly to the health of the local economy.

The 1997 NC Department of Agriculture Census of Agriculture

(NC Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 1998)

lists approximately 44,500 (18.5%) acres in Henderson County

as devoted to agricultural production. This figure represents a

decrease in acreage of approximately 15% from 1992. During

the same period, average farm size decreased 11% and the

number of full time farms decreased from 282 to 258. The

decrease in land dedicated to agricultural use is noticeable in

the local landscape as traditional farm or estate based land

uses are converted to uses with distinct suburban overtones.

The market value of all agricultural products sold in

Henderson County was $47 million in 1997, a 10% increased

from 1992. While agriculture is a significant contributor to the

local economy, agricultural-related employment represents a

relatively small (3%) percentage of the local civilian work

force.

Demographic figures support general observations by the

planning team that Henderson County is a growing

community whose residents are becoming increasingly older

and more affluent. The influence of this demographic shift is

felt at the park in many ways.

• Community residents are actively engaged and

participating in local government and communityoriented activities.

• Many retired persons are willing and eager participants in

volunteer activities at the park.

• Day use of the park by local residents has increased

steadily over time. The activity of walking for exercise has

become particularly popular with retired persons.

Factors in this category describe the existing conditions

related to quality of life and the socioeconomic environment

potentially impacted by implementation of the alternatives.

Economic contribution to community

As an individual entity, the park contributes to the local

economy by attracting several thousand visitors each year. It

is also an integral component of the overall tourism

experience that makes Henderson County a successful tourist

destination. In addition, the park contributes directly to the

local economy by hiring permanent and part time employees

and purchasing goods and services from local suppliers. The

current operating budget of the park is $923,700 per year.

Over 90% of that total directly influences the local economy

through employee wages, benefits, and local purchases.

 Mandatory Impact Topics 
C h a p t e r T h r e e  A f f e c t e d E n v i r o n m e n t

77

 Existing Conditions 

Provides additional opportunities for walking

The demand for safe and attractive walking trails is increasing

community wide as the population of retired persons grows.

Excellent opportunities to walk for exercise exist at the park

and many local residents visit the park specifically for this

activity. Only the construction of additional historic walking

trails would be considered for the existing site and none are

known. Few trail side amenities exist and connection to the

greenway system occurs at the park entrance.

Provides incentives for partnering with local governments,

community groups, and individual citizens

Park management is actively engaged, dedicated, and a willing

member of the local community. It continues to cooperate

constructively on issues of mutual interest and concern and

works to strengthen its traditionally close relationship with

friends support groups, volunteers, local government officials,

and local cultural and natural heritage institutions.

C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Consequences

79

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

OF THE PROPOSAL AND ALTERNATIVES

Chapter Overview

The environmental consequences chapter describes and

analyzes potential environmental impacts associated with

three alternatives and a No Action alternative. The chapter

describes the methodology used to analyze impacts and

potential environmental consequences of each alternative. A

preferred alternative and an environmentally preferred

alternative are identified based on the analysis.

Methodology

In this analysis, the term “factor” describes a potential

environmental consequence used to compare the alternatives.

Factors represent areas of environmental concern expressed

by NPS technical advisors, federal and state agencies, local

governments, park staff, community organizations, and

individual citizens. High and low assessment criteria were

established for each factor. H igh criteria describe very

favorable or desirable environmental conditions. Minimum

criterion generally reflect the minimum standards permitted by

Federal Law or NPS policy.

Minimum criteria were used to screen for components of

alternatives incompatible with law and policy or which caused

impairment to park resources. Components of alternatives

that did not meet minimum standards were removed from

consideration. A discussion of components considered but

rejected appears in Chapter II.

Once adjusted to satisfy minimum criteria, alternatives were

assessed for their ability to satisfy the high criteria of each

factor and potential cumulative impacts. Cumulative impacts

are environmental impacts that result from incremental impact

of the action when added to other past, present, and

reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what

agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such

other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually

minor but collectively significant actions taking place over

time. Environmental consequences common to the action

alternatives (discussed in Chapter II) were assessed in

association with the action alternatives to allow a direct

comparison to the No Action alternative.

The following scale was used to assess each factor:

Exceptional – results of implementing the alternative

clearly meet and exceed the high criteria. An assessment

of exceptional is the most desirable assessment and

indicates that implementing the alternative would most

likely result in a highly desirable, unique, or beneficial

environmental condition readily noticed by visitors.

Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a positive

assessment indicating that implementing the alternative

would result in conditions which generally satisfy the high

criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would not be

noticed by most visitors.

Minor – results of implementing the alternative do not

satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well

short of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is

a neutral assessment acknowledging a less than optimum

environmental condition that can be successfully

managed to minimize its impact on visitor experience or

resource protection goals.

Negligible – results of implementing the alternative are

notably less than the preferred condition but still exceed

minimum criteria for the factor and do not cause resource

impairment. An assessment of negligible generally

indicates some visitors may perceive an environmental

condition associated with implementation of the

alternative as a distraction, inconvenience, or unfulfilled

desire.

Selection of a preferred alternative was accomplished using

Choosing by Advantages (Suhr 1999) - a decision making

process based on calculating and compiling the advantages of

different alternatives for a variety of factors. Advantages were

determined by calculating the difference between assessments

for each factor among the alternatives. Figure 4-a shows the

CHAPTER FOUR
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

80

matrix used to convert assessment values to advantages in the

analysis.

Once advantages were calculated for each factor, a compiled

list was created. A most important advantage was selected

from the compiled list and assigned an importance value of

100. The remaining advantages were then given importance

values relative to the most important advantage and totals were

calculated for each alternative. The alternative that received

the highest compiled score was identified as the preferred

alternative. Figure 4-b documents the factors, assessments, and

importance values used to determine the preferred alternative.

The environmentally preferred alternative is the alternative that

best promotes the national environmental policy as expressed

in NEPA; is determined to cause the least damage to the

biological and physical environment; and best protects,

preserves, and enhances the historic, cultural, and natural

resources of the park. The factors used to analyze and select

a preferred alternative express the same values used to select

an environmentally preferred alternative. Therefore, the

environmentally preferred alternative is also considered to be

the alternative that achieved the highest total importance value

in the Choosing by Advantages analysis.

Assessment Categories and Factors

The following factors and corresponding criteria were used to

assess potential environmental consequences. For easier

discussion and comparison, like factors are grouped into five

assessment categories:

1. Cultural Resource Management

2. Interpretation and Museum Operations

3. Natural Resources

4. Park Operations and Administration

5. Quality of Life and Socioeconomic Environment\

Cultural Resource Management

Actions proposed in this document are subject to section 106

of the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act, as amended in

1992 (16 USC 470); the National Environmental Policy Act; the

National Park Service’s Director’s Order #28 (Cultural

Resource Management), Director’s Order #2 (Park Planning),

Director’s Order #24 (NPS Museum Collections

Management), and Director’s Order #12 (Conservation

Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decisionmaking) which require the consideration of impacts on

cultural resources in or eligible for the National Register of

Historic Places.

Factors in this assessment category help focus the analysis on

environmental consequences that potentially affect the historic

integrity of cultural resources at the park.

Factors:

• Preservation of Historic Building Interiors. High Criteria:

All historic building interiors are preserved or restored

and furnished to the period of significance. Preservation

is preferred over restoration. Minimum Criteria:

Rehabilitation - any proposed change to the interior of a

historic structure would comply with the Secretary of the

Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic

Properties, DO-28, and other applicable federal policy

guidelines. Historic furnishings displaced due to

rehabilitation of historic structure interiors will be

incorporated into museum storage.

Minor

Moderate

Exceptional

Lowest assigned assessment of factor for all alternatives

(noted by an underline in CBA Analysis Summary Table) 

Advantage = amount of difference 

between compared assessments

small advantage moderate 

advantage

Exceptional Moderate Minor

Assessment of factor for 

specific alternative being compared

(no advantage)

(no advantage)

Negligible

(no advantage)

(no advantage)

small advantage

Note: a "no advantage" advantage is represented in the CBA Analysys Summary Table by a blank cell 

 

Negligible

small advantage moderate 

advantage large advantage

Attrib_AssessTable.eps

Figure 4-a. Factor Assessment to Advantage Conversion Table

 Methodology 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

81

• Introduction of non-period of significance elements to

the historic landscape. High Criteria: Only non-period of

significance elements essential for visitor safety and

orientation are visible. Minimum Criteria: Any non

contributing addition to the historic landscape would

comply with Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of

Historic Properties, DO-28, and all other applicable

federal policy guidelines.

• Opportunities for solitude or a contemplative experience.

High Criteria: Creating and maintaining locations where

visitors can experience solitude is preferred condition.

Crowding, exposure to external sounds, and/or viewing

non historic landscape elements is assumed to negatively

impact opportunities for solitude or contemplation.

Minimum Criteria: No minimum criteria established.

Interpretation and Museum Operations

Internal scoping revealed a deep concern by park staff and the

public about proposed actions that potentially impact

interpretive programs, educational opportunities, and museum

operations at the park. Actions proposed in this document are

subject to the National Environmental Policy Act; the National

Park Service’s Director’s Order #28 (Cultural Resource

Management), Director’s Order #2 (Park Planning), Director’s

Order #24 (NPS Museum Collections Management), and

Director’s Order #12 (Conservation Planning, Environmental

Impact Analysis, and Decision-making) which require the

consideration of significant impacts that are likely to be highly

controversial and potentially affect important scientific,

cultural, or historic resources.

Factors in this assessment category help focus the analysis on

environmental consequences that potentially affect

opportunities to learn about the life and works of Carl

Sandburg.

Factors:

• Provides high quality facilities capable of supporting a

variety of interpretation and museum programs. High

Criteria: Creating facilities that support both large and

small interpretation and museum programs is the most

desired condition. Minimum Criteria: A minimum

number of facilities is not established.

• Provides opportunities for NPS personnel (staff or trained

volunteers) to interact with visitors and interpret the

Sandburg story. High Criteria: Multiple opportunities for

NPS interpretive and museum operation staff to interact

with visitors both in and outside the park is preferred

condition. Opportunities would occur in formal and

impromptu situations, include individual and group

experiences, and be able to support professional and

amateur researchers. Minimum Criteria: No minimum

standard.

• Provides opportunities for public access to museum

collection and related information. High Criteria: Multiple

intellectual access points that provide convenient and

appropriate public access to more of the museum

collection is preferred. Access points would enhance

opportunities to experience museum objects as well as

information contained in museum archives. Minimum

Criteria: Any proposed implementation strategy would

comply with DO-28, NPS Museum Handbook, and all

other applicable NPS museum policy guidelines.

• Promotes continued learning and research of Carl

Sandburg. High Criteria: Provides convenient and

appropriate opportunities for professional and amateur

researchers to access park resources. Creates interpretive

environments that encourage visitors to read and learn

more about Carl Sandburg and his work when their visit

has concluded. Minimum Criteria: No minimum

standard.

• Provides opportunity to link park themes with local, state,

national, and international education programs. High

Criteria: Creates multiple opportunities for the park to

develop and integrate its programs with public and private

organizations that encourage continued learning about

Carl Sandburg and his works. Minimum Criteria: no

minimum standard.

Natural Resource Management

Actions proposed in this document are subject to the National

Environmental Policy Act; the National Park Service’s

Director’s Order #28 (Cultural Resource Management),

Director’s Order #2 (Park Planning), Director’s Order #24

(NPS Museum Collections Management), Director’s Order #12

(Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and

Decision-making), and Director’s Order #77 (Natural

Resource Management) which require the consideration of

significant impacts likely to affect natural resources in the

park.

The reader should note that all lands within the current

boundaries of the park are managed as a cultural resource. As

such, the physical, chemical, and biological resources located

on them are maintained to reflect the attributes most

associated with the historic significance of the site. Significant

change to the existing natural environment is not anticipated

in any alternative. However, the placement of additional

visitor service infrastructure would result in some vegetation

removal that must be accounted for in the EIS. The following

factor focuses the analysis on impacts to the natural

environment most affected by removal of vegetation.

 Assessment Categories and Factors 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

82

Moderate Moderate Moderate Negligible

67

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 67 67

Moderate Minor Negligible Minor

100 Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage 54 54

Moderate Exceptional Minor Minor

Small 

advantage 48 74

Negligible Minor Moderate Exceptional

Small 

advantage 37 62 Large 

advantage 82

Moderate Moderate Moderate Exceptional

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

50

Minor Minor Moderate Exceptional

54 74

Minor Minor Moderate Exceptional

65 90

Moderate Moderate Moderate Exceptional

40

ALTERNATIVES

FACTORS No Action

(Existing Conditions) Connemara Lifestyle Paths of Discovery Sandburg Center 

Preservation of historic building interiors

Introduction of non-contributing

elements to the historic landscape 

Opportunities for solitude or a 

contemplative experience

Provides high quality facilities to 

support a variety of interpretation 

and curatorial programs

Provides visitors with opportunities for 

personal contact with NPS personnel

(staff or trained volunteer) 

Provides opportunities for public access 

to museum collection and related information 

Promotes continued learning 

and research of Carl Sandburg 

Provides opportunity to link park 

themes with local, state, national 

and international education programs 

Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv.

ASSESSMENT

CATEGORY Cultural Resource Management Interpretation and Museum Operations

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Notes: 

1. A "no advantage" advantage is represented in the importance value column by a blank cell

2. The lowest assessment for each factor is highlighted in the assessment row by a heavy underline. In instances 

where more than one alternative scores lowest, only one is highlighted.

3. The alternative with the highest advantage in each factor is highlighted by an oval. In instances where more 

than one alternative has the highest advantage, only one is highlighted.

CBAalts1.eps

Import.

Value

Figure 4-b. Factors, Assessments, and Importance Values

 Assessment Categories and Factors 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

83

Moderate Moderate

Moderate Moderate

28

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

Medium

advantage 

28

Minor

70 70 70

Exceptional Exceptional Exceptional

Minor Minor

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

36 36

Minor

Minor

Moderate Moderate Minor

Small 

advantage 17 17

Exceptional Moderate

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

Small 

advantage

44 29

Moderate Moderate Moderate Exceptional

46

Minor Minor Moderate Moderate

15

312 347 459 540

15

ALTERNATIVES

FACTORS Existing Conditions

(No Action) Connemara Lifestyle Paths of Discovery Sandburg Center 

Minimizes maintenance responsibility

Provides addional parking spaces 

Enhances employee, volunteer,

and visitor safety

Enhances energy conservation

or reduces energy consumption

Provides additional opportunities

for walking 

Provides incentives for partnering

 with local governments, community groups,

and individual citizens

Potential economic benefit

to local community

TOTAL RELATIVE IMPORTANCE VALUE

Medium

advantage 

Small 

advantage

Minor

Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv.

ASSESSMENT

CATAGORY Park Operations and Administration Qualtiy of Life and Socio-economic Environment

Minor Minor

CBAalts2.eps

Medium

advantage 

Moderate Negligible Negligible Negligible

52

Potential to preserve existing vegetation

Assess.

Nat. Res. Mgt.

Adv.

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Figure 4-b. Factors, Assessments, and Importance Values (continued)

 Assessment Categories and Factors 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

84

Factor:

• Potential to preserve existing vegetation. High Criteria:

No removal of vegetation beyond what is required to

protect visitor safety or historic resources is the preferred

condition. Minimum Criteria: Any proposed

implementation strategy would comply with DO-77 and

all other applicable federal policy and Federal and state

water quality standards.

Park Operations and Administration

A significant concern was voiced by park staff and visitors

about actions that increase the park’s maintenance, curatorial,

and administrative obligations. Factors in this assessment

category help focus the analysis on environmental

consequences that potentially affect park operations and

administrative functions.

Factors:

• Minimizes maintenance responsibilities. High

Criteria: Environmental conditions are created that are

conducive to efficiently maintaining resources and

conducting maintenance operations without need to

increase staff or purchase specialized equipment is

preferred condition. Minimum Criteria: Minimum

maintenance standards as specified in NPS Management

Polices and other Federal and State regulations.

• Provides additional parking spaces. High Criteria: A

recent transportation study (National Park Service 2000)

conservatively estimated an additional 27 to 45 spaces

were needed to accommodate visitors during peak

visitation periods. For the No action and Connemara

Lifestyle alternatives, the preferred minimum number of

additional parking spaces is 45. For Sandburg Center and

Paths of Discovery alternatives, the preferred minimum

number of additional spaces is 45 plus additional parking

to allow safe and convenient access to the visitor center.

Minimum Criteria: Because no minimum standard is

established by law or policy, alternatives that provide

fewer than the 27 additional parking spaces recommended

by the transportation study will be considered as satisfying

the minimum standard for this factor.

• Enhances employee, volunteer, and visitor health and

safety. High Criteria: Minimizing risk and maintaining

environmental conditions that are healthy and safe is

preferred condition. Minimum Criteria: Alternatives will

satisfy all applicable NPS health and safety standards.

• Enhances energy conservation or reduces energy

consumption. High Criteria: All facilities and operations

incorporate sustainable design elements and practices to

ensure that water and energy efficiency, pollution

prevention, and waste prevention and reduction are

standard practice. Minimum Criteria: new facilities and

operations incorporate sustainable design elements and

practices to ensure that water and energy efficiency,

pollution prevention, and waste prevention and reduction

are standard practice. Existing facilities and operations

are modified as practicable.

Quality of Life and Socioeconomic

Environment

The National Park Service’s Director’s Order #28 (Cultural

Resource Management), Director’s Order #2 (Park Planning),

and Director’s Order #12 (Conservation Planning,

Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision-making) require

the consideration of socioeconomic impacts in local and

regional communities that could result from implementation

of an alternative. Factors in this category help identify and

assess significant socioeconomic impacts of the alternatives on

quality of life in the surrounding communities.

Factors:

• Provides additional opportunities for walking. High

Criteria: Creating additional opportunities for walking is

preferred condition. Minimum Criteria: Trails are

provided in a manner that does not compromise the

integrity of cultural and natural resources in the park. Any

additional provisions for walking would comply with

Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic

Properties, DO-28, and all other applicable federal policy

guidelines.

• Provides incentives for partnering with local governments,

community groups, and individual citizens. High Criteria:

Opportunities are created that require interaction with

local governments, community groups, and individual

citizens to provide services and facilities to satisfy

common needs and desires. Minimum Criteria. No

minimum standard.

• Potential economic benefit to community. High Criteria:

The park contributes substantially to the local and

regional economy by encouraging tourism, purchasing

goods and services, and providing jobs. Increasing the

length of time visitors remain in park is an important

consideration. Minimum Criteria: No minimum standard.

Assessment of Potential

Environmental Consequences

Associated With the No Action

Alternative

Cultural Resource Management

Factors in this category describe environmental consequences

to cultural resources that could result from a continuation of

 Analysis of No Action Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

85

current management practices (implementation of the No

Action alternative).

Factor: Preservation of Historic Building Interiors

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Park management would rehabilitate additional historic

building interiors only for the most critical needs. This

alternative assumes no additional maintenance, administrative,

or visitor service support facilities would be constructed at the

park and that an increase in visitation, operational

responsibilities, and demand for improved visitor services over

time would pressure park managers to rehabilitate up to two

historic structure interiors to address these needs. The

rehabilitation of any historic structure would not occur prior

to a detailed review of the proposed action by the NPS using

the most appropriate level of planning and NEPA compliance

documentation.

Cumulative Impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts to resources outside park boundaries have been

identified. Within park boundaries, several historic structures

are already used for administrative or maintenance functions

and closed to public access. Given the understanding that

rehabilitation can potentially alter historic interiors

permanently, the cumulative impact of successive

rehabilitations to historic structures over time could limit

future management options to preserve or restore those

resources.

Factor: Introduction of non-period elements to the historic

landscape

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Additional alteration to the historic landscape would not

occur. The following non-historic elements exist in the

historic landscape at this time and would remain:

• A shuttle vehicle would continue to transport visitors with

disabilities up the steep slope from the parking area to the

main house area.

• The trailer comfort station near the main house would

remain in service at the same location.

• The parking and public entrance on Little River Road,

visitor information and comfort station, concrete walks,

and a non-historic natural surface walking trail around

Front Lake would remain in service. Four picnic tables

located between the visitor information station and Little

River Road would be maintained.

• The maintenance facility, museum preservation facility,

and headquarters building would not be improved or

enlarged and remain in their existing locations.

• Volunteers would continue to park in the volunteers -

parking area.

• The amphitheater would continue in operation at the

existing location. The facility would be maintained but

not improved.

• Existing trail side amenities would remain in place.

Additional trail side benches and trash cans would not be

installed.

• Existing outdoor interpretive waysides would remain in

place. Additional outdoor waysides would not be

installed.

While non-historic elements are evident to the discriminating

eye, such additions do not reduce most visitors’ ability to

comprehend and enjoy the historic ambiance of the site. The

majority of visitors find it easy to extrapolate from the

landscape they see to the historic landscape as it existed

during the Sandburg residency.

Cumulative impacts: The character of the landscape

surrounding the park is gradually becoming more suburban in

nature. Some suburban infrastructure such as homes and

communication towers is visible from the park. While local

subdivision regulations provide park managers an opportunity

to consult on proposed developments, suburban growth

pressures would likely result in modern development visible

from the park. No cumulative impacts inside the park are

anticipated beyond what is already present.

Factor: Opportunities for solitude or a contemplative

experience.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Opportunities for solitude or a contemplative experience are

common along the wooded trails, at Big Glassy overlook, and

in the pasture areas year around except during the highest of

peak visitation days. Such experiences occur in the main

house and barn areas of the park during periods of low

visitation.

 Analysis of No Action Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

86

As the number of visitors and variety of uses increases,

opportunities for solitude and contemplative experiences

would decrease slightly over time.

Cumulative impacts: As the character of the surrounding

community becomes more suburban, fewer opportunities for

solitude and contemplative experiences would exist outside

park boundaries and community residents may become more

dependent on Carl Sandburg Home NHS as a recreation

resource. The local greenway proposal may reduce this impact

to a certain degree if it is funded and constructed in its

entirely.

Interpretation and Museum Operations

Factors in this category describe environmental consequences

related to interpretation and museum operations that could

result from a continuation of current management practices

(implementation of the No Action alternative).

Factor: Provides high quality facilities capable of supporting a

variety of interpretation/education/museum programs.

Assessment: Negligible – results of implementing the alternative

are notably less than the preferred condition but still exceed

minimum criteria for the factor and do not cause resource

impairment. An assessment of negligible generally indicates

some visitors may perceive an environmental condition

associated with implementation of the alternative as a

distraction, inconvenience, or unfulfilled desire.

Interpretation: The amphitheater, main house, and barn area

continue to serve as the principle venues for tour and

performance-type interpretive experiences. Opportunities for

growth of dynamic and interactive interpretive programs are

limited by size and location conflicts.

The house garage is the only facility capable of

accommodating an indoor lecture style interpretive program.

Because indoor program space is limited, scheduling conflicts

occur during periods of inclement weather. Informal learning

experiences continue to occur at the horse barn and

amphitheater, weather permitting. Outdoor educational

experiences are available. Opportunities for additional

dynamic and interactive education programs are significantly

limited in this alternative.

Museum: Original historic materials associated with the

Sandburgs can be viewed at the main house (household and

professional objects), woodshed (farm equipment), barn

garage (farm vehicles), and shaving shed (farm equipment).

Some historic objects continue to degrade because of changes

in humidity, temperature, and light at these locations. Access

to some historic objects and archives remains inconvenient to

the general public because of the limited number of protected

environments necessary to increase research or interpretation

services.

Cumulative impacts: Interpretation: No significant negative

cumulative impacts on interpretation are associated with this

factor.

Museum: Historic objects can tolerate a finite exposure to

heat, humidity, and light before they must be returned to the

museum preservation facility for permanent storage or major

conservation treatment. Some historic objects in this

alternative would be exhibited in an uncontrolled climatic

environment. Objects that have reached their maximum

exposure levels would be removed from exhibit status to avoid

permanent resource damage. Removal of original objects may

need to be reduced by replacement with reproduction or

period objects.

Factor: Provides visitors with opportunities for personal

contact with NPS personnel (staff or trained volunteers).

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

The park continues to provide high quality on-site personal

interpretation to visitors at the main house and barn area

locations on a regular basis. School-based education program

is provided for students in local schools.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Provides opportunities for public access to museum

collection and related information.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative

do not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Visitors may view historic objects at the main house, barn

garage, woodshed, milk house, and shaving shed. Many of

Carl Sandburg’s furnishings and library are exhibited at the

main house and can be viewed by participating in the guided

house tour. A significant number of Carl Sandburg’s personal

possessions and almost all historic archives are stored in the

museum preservation center. Access to the museum

preservation center is available by appointment.

The number of public intellectual access points for

information contained in the museum collection is very low

(Van Beck, 2000). This alternative assumes that while museum

objects and archives would continue to be well maintained,

 Analysis of No Action Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

87

the number of intellectual access points would not increase

significantly.

Cumulative impacts: Accumulated exposures to humidity, light,

and heat would necessitate the removal of some objects and

manuscripts to the museum preservation facility for

permanent storage. While the removal of single objects is not

necessarily significant, the total number of objects removed

over time would result in a significant reduction in public

access to information in the museum collection. No

significant negative cumulative impacts to resources outside

park boundaries have been identified for this factor.

Factor: Promotes continued learning and research of Carl

Sandburg.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative

do not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Opportunity to expand continued learning and research

activities is limited by lack of adequate support facilities and

staff. Outside research is supported to the extent possible by

the existing curatorial and interpretation staff but

accommodating large groups or individuals for extended

periods of time is not possible.

Cumulative impacts: Many people interested in Carl Sandburg

today lived during the time when he was actively writing and

lecturing. As time goes by, people are becoming less familiar

with the author’s works. Unless younger people can be

exposed to Carl Sandburgs works, interest in continued

learning and research about Carl Sandburg is expected to

decline over time. Manifestations of this trend have already

caused a number of Sandburg books to go out of print.

No significant negative cumulative impacts to resources

outside park boundaries have been identified for this factor.

Factor: Provides opportunity to link park themes with local,

state, national, and international education programs.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Park interpretive programs are conducted primarily on site and

successfully integrated into local education programs directly

by park staff with assistance by area educators. Teacher

workshops are conducted on-site and focus on park resources.

Curriculum materials are developed by park staff and local

educators. The full potential for state, national, and

international education programs is not fully realized.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Natural Resource Management

The following factor describes the potential environmental

consequences to natural resources that could result from a

continuation of existing conditions (implementation of the

No Action alternative).

Factors: Potential to preserve existing vegetation

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

The natural environment of the park remains predominantly

unchanged from existing conditions. Since new construction

activity is the primary cause of vegetation removal and ground

disturbance and no additional infrastructure is recommended

in this alternative, significant impact to natural resources is not

expected. Minor vegetation removal associated with normal

maintenance activities would occur. Impacts resulting from

increased visitor and recreation use would be reduced on site

using normal maintenance techniques and procedures.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Park Operations and Administration

Factors in this category describe potential environmental

consequences to park administration and operations resulting

from a continuation of current management practices

(implementation of the No Action alternative). Staffing needs

for current conditions are assumed to be represented by the

number of STF employees (all of which should be classified as

FT) and currently authorized but unfunded ranger and

museum technician positions.

Factor: Minimizes maintenance and administrative

responsibilities.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Administration and support services personnel continue to

provide supervisory management and/or administrative

 Analysis of No Action Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

88

support for park personnel and activities without increasing

staff levels.

More visitors cause work load to increase gradually over time

and park staff compensates by limiting its operations to the

most essential functions and improving efficiency through new

technology.

Maintenance staff continues to fulfill its responsibilities

without increasing staff level. Volunteer labor is able to

supplement the maintenance operation to a limited degree.

Resources management staff continues to fulfill its

responsibilities for NEPA and Section 106 compliance, safety

management, law enforcement, natural and cultural resource

inventory and monitoring without additional staff.

Curatorial staffing levels would remain insufficient given the

continued deterioration of museum objects and the demands

of meeting NPS standards for preservation, record keeping,

and access for a large museum collection.

The park interpretive staff continues to provide quality visitor

interpretation and education services to people at existing

levels on site and in the local community. Staffing levels do not

increase and volunteers provide a critical contribution to the

interpretive and educational program efforts of the park.

Given increasing numbers of visitors, the vulnerability of

resources to theft and vandalism, mounting traffic congestion,

and changes in the nature of the surrounding community, the

part-time law enforcement presence would not be sufficient to

properly protect park resources and enforce park regulations.

Cumulative impacts:

No significant negative cumulative impacts are associated with

this factor.

Factor: Provides additional parking spaces.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

A parking deficit still exists. Eight additional spaces are gained

in the visitor parking area by reducing the size of existing

spaces and restriping, but this increase is not expected to

compensate for the greater number of visitors. Visitors are not

authorized to park at the park headquarters or maintenance

facility or in the volunteers parking area without special

permission from the Superintendent due to the limitations of

access along a historic one lane road.

Cumulative impacts: As the number of parking spaces in this

alternative is finite and the number of visitors anticipated to

grow over time, parking problems at the park would

contribute to a growing community-wide parking shortage.

Factor: Enhances employee, volunteer, and visitor health and

safety.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

The overall park environment is safe and healthy for

employees, volunteers, and visitors. A continuation of existing

conditions is not expected to result in the development of

unsafe or unhealthy conditions over time.

Parking on the shoulder of Little River Road continues to

occur and visibility is partially reduced for drivers and

pedestrians trying to cross the street. Increased potential for

vehicle and pedestrian accidents during periods of significant

traffic congestion exists.

A regular two way flow of pedestrians and vehicles moves

between the headquarters and maintenance buildings and the

volunteer parking area. Low vehicle speeds, safety training,

and observant employees reduce the potential for accidents.

Cumulative impacts: Exposure to health and safety risks for

employees, volunteers, and visitors near the visitors parking

area and on Little River Road could increase slightly over time

as a result of increased vehicle traffic. Risk could be reduced

by adding traffic control devices at critical intersections but

such measures might negatively impact the historic character

of the park and surrounding neighborhood.

Factor: Enhances energy conservation or reduces energy

consumption.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Excessive energy consumption does not result from current

NPS activity. A continuation of existing conditions is not

expected to increase the level of energy consumption

significantly over time. No new structures that require the

consumption of additional energy would be built.

Vehicles continuously circulating in the visitor’s parking area

waste energy and cause traffic congestion on Little River Road.

Congestion is especially intense when park visitors and

 Analysis of No Action Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

89

patrons of the Flat Rock Playhouse arrive or depart at the

same time.

Public transportation to the park is not assumed to be

provided in this alternative.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Quality of Life and Socioeconomic

Environment

Factors in this category describe potential environmental

consequences to quality of life and socioeconomic values

resulting from a continuation of current management

practices (implementation of the No Action alternative).

Factor: Provides additional opportunities for walking.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Opportunities to walk for exercise are available but additional

walking trails are not constructed. Trail side amenities remain

at existing levels and connection to the greenway system

occurs at the park entrance.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor. Local greenway system

helps reduce some of the impact of not expanding walking

opportunities for local residents in the park.

Factor: Provides incentives for partnering with local

governments, community groups, and individual citizens.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Park management remains engaged, dedicated, and a willing

member of the local community. It cooperates constructively

on issues of mutual interest and concern and works to

strengthen its traditionally close relationship with friends

support groups, volunteers, and local government officials.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Potential economic benefit to community.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

The park contributes to the local economy by attracting

tourists, providing permanent and part time employment

opportunities, and purchasing goods and services from local

suppliers. While the exact amount contributed to the local

economy by these actions is unknown, it is logical to assume

that positive economic benefit results from increased

expenditures by the park. It is assumed that because

additional interpretive programs and resources are not

included in this alternative, length of stay per visitor would not

increase substantially. Overnight stays and expenditures by

visitors at local businesses could increase slightly in

conjunction with the increase in total visitors over time.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Summary of adverse effects that cannot be

avoided

These are impacts that cannot be fully mitigated or avoided.

Exposure of historic artifacts and manuscripts to light, heat,

and humidity would continue, ultimately resulting in their

removal to the museum preservation facility for permanent

storage. Such impacts would be more significant in the No

Action alternative as fewer climate-controlled environments

are in place to slow the deterioration process and provide

public access to historic artifacts and manuscripts.

Summary of irreversible or irretrievable

commitments of resources

Irreversible commitments are those that cannot be reversed,

except perhaps in the extreme long term. Irretrievable

commitments are those that are lost for a period of time.

Irreversible commitments: Historic objects can tolerate only a

finite amount of exposure to heat, humidity, and light before

they must be returned to the museum preservation facility for

permanent storage or major conservation treatment. In the

No Action alternative, exposure of historic artifacts and

manuscripts to light, heat, and humidity would continue

(particularly in the main house), ultimately resulting in their

removal to the museum preservation facility for permanent

storage. Overexposure of historic artifacts and manuscripts to

light, heat, and humidity would cause significant deterioration

in those resources that cannot be reversed.

Irretrievable commitments: No irretrievable commitments have

been identified for this alternative.

 Analysis of No Action Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

90

Summary of the relationship between shortterm uses of the environment and

maintenance and enhancement of long-term

productivity

For the purposes of this discussion, short term is defined as

the time span for which this General Management Plan is

expected to be effective (generally assumed to be 15-20 years)

and long term is defined as a period beyond that time.

In the No Action alternative, the short term benefits of

increasing visitor understanding of the Sandburg story by

providing public access to historic objects is facilitated by the

display of sensitive materials in uncontrolled climatic

environments. Because these objects can tolerate only a finite

exposure to such conditions and the No Action alternative

does not provide additional public access points that protect

objects from such exposures, the long term productivity of

these sensitive historic resources is assumed to be reduced.

Assessment of Potential

Environmental Impacts Associated

With the Sandburg Center

Alternative.

Cultural Resource Management

Factors in this category describe impacts to cultural resources

that could result from implementing the Sandburg Center

alternative.

Factor: Preservation of Historic Building Interiors

Assessment: Negligible – results of implementing the

alternative are notably less than the preferred condition but

still exceed minimum criteria for the factor and do not cause

resource impairment. An assessment of negligible generally

indicates some visitors may perceive an environmental

condition associated with implementation of the alternative as

a distraction, inconvenience, or unfulfilled desire.

No historic building interior would be rehabilitated for

administrative, storage, or maintenance use. Over time, all

administrative and maintenance operations based in historic

structures, with the exception of the visitor contact area in the

main house basement, would be relocated to the park services

or visitor services zones.

The exteriors of historic structures would not be altered by the

proposed action and all exterior structure conditions would

be preserved or restored to the period of significance over

time.

Park management would rehabilitate additional historic

building interiors to provide additional space for interpretive

programs. The exact location, number, and functions of

historic structure interiors rehabilitations would be

determined by a future Development Concept Plan. It is

important to note that no rehabilitation of an historic

structure interior would occur prior to a detailed

documentation of the historic resource by the NPS and a

public review of the proposed NPS rehabilitation action using

the appropriate level of park planning and NEPA compliance

documentation.

Cumulative Impact: No significant negative cumulative impacts

to resources outside park boundaries have been identified.

Inside the park, the cumulative impact of multiple

rehabilitations to historic structure interiors over time could

limit future management options to preserve or restore those

resources.

Factor: Introduction of non-period elements to the historic

landscape

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Non-historic elements would be most evident in the visitor

services and park services zones where additional

infrastructure is needed to accomplish the enhanced

interpretive and educational goals of the alternative. Nonhistoric elements introduced into the historic interaction zone

would be accomplished in such ways as to protect the visitor’s

ability to comprehend and enjoy the historic ambiance of the

site. The majority of visitors would find it relatively easy to

extrapolate from the landscape they see to the historic

landscape as it existed during the Sandburg residency. Nonhistoric elements would be minimized in the historic discovery

zone.

The following non-historic elements are proposed or present

in the historic landscape for this alternative:

• An increased number of visible interpretive waysides

would be placed near trails in the visitor services and

historic interaction zones. The appropriate number and

location for these elements would be determined in a

comprehensive interpretive master plan, cultural

landscape report, trail management plan, or development

concept plan.

• The existing trailer comfort station near the main house

would be replaced by a sensitively designed new facility of

approximately the same size at the same location. Design

alternatives for the new facility would be developed and

coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Officer as

required by NPS policy.

 Analysis of Sandburg Center Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

91

• The parking and public entrance area on Little River Road

would be redesigned and enlarged to accommodate

additional vehicles. Design alternatives for these

improvements would be proposed in a development

concept plan and coordinated with the State Historic

Preservation Officer and the public as required by NPS

policy.

• Visitor service infrastructure would be enhanced in the

visitor services zone by modifying the visitor information

and comfort station to provide additional interpretive,

educational, and information capabilities. The nonhistoric walking trails in the visitor services zone would

remain and additional trails could be added. A small area

for picnic tables could be included in the design if desired.

Design alternatives for these improvements would be

developed in a development concept plan and

coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Officer

and the public as required by NPS policy.

• A shuttle vehicle would continue to transport visitors who

need assistance up the steep slope from the parking area

to the main house area. The visual impacts of the

transport vehicle would be reduced by replacing it with a

less visually and audibly intrusive vehicle.

• The existing amphitheater would be replaced by a new

facility constructed at one of the three approved sites.

• The historic landscape of the park would represent the

period of significance as directed in the zone descriptions

of this GMP. The landscape of the old amphitheater

would be restored to period conditions. Site specific

historic landscape management and implementation

procedures within specific zones would be recommended

and documented in a cultural landscape report or

development concept plan.

• Trail side amenities such as benches and trash receptacles

would occur in the historic interaction zone. Visible

interpretive media, trail side benches, trash cans and other

nonessential visitor services infrastructure would be

removed from the historic discovery zone.

• The maintenance facility, museum preservation facility,

and headquarters building would remain in the same

locations. Facilities could be enlarged as needed. All

administrative and maintenance use of historic structures

in the historic interaction and historic discovery zone

would be moved to the park services or visitor services

zone over time.

• Volunteers parking area would be enlarged by

approximately 1000 SF and redesigned to improve traffic

flow and accessibility.

Cumulative impacts: The character of the landscape

surrounding the park is gradually becoming more suburban in

nature. Proposed improvements to the visitor parking area and

construction of an new visitor center and parking area, when

combined with other potential commercial and residential

developments in the Village of Flat Rock would contribute to

the overall trend of suburbanization in the local area. The

NPS can reduce impacts associated with new park

infrastructure by using sensitive design and construction

techniques and protecting 110 undeveloped acres between Big

Glassy and Little River road. However, some contribution to

the overall trend of higher development densities in the local

landscape is likely to occur.

Factor: Opportunities for solitude or a contemplative

experience.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Opportunities for solitude or contemplative experiences

would be less frequent in this alternative than the No Action

alternative and the Connemara Lifestyle alternative. Multiple

activities occurring near the main house and barn areas could

reduce opportunities for solitude in those areas. Visitors

would continue to find solitude or contemplative experiences

along the wooded trails, at Big Glassy overlook, and in the

pasture areas on most non-peak visitation days. The NPS can

reduce impacts on solitude associated with new park

programs and infrastructure by protecting the 110 undeveloped

acres between Big Glassy and Little River road and providing

opportunities for a woodland walking experience there.

Cumulative impacts: As the character of the surrounding

community becomes more suburban, fewer opportunities for

solitude and contemplative experiences would exist outside

park boundaries. The addition of an off-site visitor center

would make the local community a more desirable tourism

destination and attract additional people to local

neighborhoods. Growth pressures may increase on community

and park resources as a consequence of rising development

and population pressures. Presumably opportunities for

solitude and contemplative experiences would be reduced

inside and outside the park over time. The NPS can reduce

cumulative impacts by protecting the 110 undeveloped acres

between Big Glassy and Little River road and providing

opportunities for a woodland walking experience there.

 Analysis of Sandburg Center Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

92

Interpretation and Museum Operations

Factors in this category describe impacts related to

interpretation, education, and museum operations that could

result from implementing the Sandburg Center Alternative.

Factor: Provides high quality facilities capable of supporting a

variety of interpretation/education/museum programs.

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the conditions described in

the high criteria. An assessment of exceptional is the most

desirable assessment and indicates that implementing the

alternative would most likely result in a highly desirable,

unique, or beneficial environmental condition readily noticed

by visitors.

Interpretation: A new visitor center facility would provide a

venue capable of integrating new technologies and techniques

with interpretive programs. Large and small group interpretive

activities could be accommodated easily. New amphitheater

facility provides an additional high quality venue for outdoor

interpretive programs. Several multipurpose interpretive

venues would be provided in rehabilitated historic structure

interiors in the historic interaction zone. An expansion or

renovation of the existing visitor information station in the

visitor services zone would serve as an interpretive resource.

Use of park resources for research is greatly enhanced by

providing additional safe and appropriate intellectual access

points for scholars, writers, and artists.

Museum: Original historic objects and archives contained in

the park’s museum collection can be exhibited in a secure and

climate controlled environment at the new visitor center and

renovated visitor information station. Intellectual access

points are increased and museum resources become a more

accessible component of the visitor experience. This

alternative makes it more feasible to borrow and exhibit

Sandburg related objects or archives from other private or

public museum collections.

Cumulative impacts:

Interpretation: No significant negative cumulative impacts on

interpretation are associated with this factor.

Museum: Historic objects can tolerate only a finite amount of

exposure to heat, humidity, and light before they must be

returned to the museum preservation facility for permanent

storage or major conservation treatment. Objects would reach

their maximum exposure levels at a slower rate if they are

exhibited in a climate controlled environment.

Factor: Provides visitors with opportunities for personal

contact with NPS personnel (staff or trained volunteers).

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the high criteria. An

assessment of exceptional is the most desirable assessment

and indicates that implementing the alternative would most

likely result in a highly desirable, unique, or beneficial

environmental condition readily noticed by visitors.

This alternative creates an environment where opportunities

for interaction between visitors and NPS staff would be

plentiful by providing additional interpretive venues and

increased access to resources for programs and exhibits.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Provides opportunities for public access to museum

collection and related information.

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the high criteria. An

assessment of exceptional is the most desirable assessment

and indicates that implementing the alternative would most

likely result in a highly desirable, unique, or beneficial

environmental condition readily noticed by visitors.

The number of public intellectual access points for

information contained in the museum collection is greatly

increased by the addition of a new off site visitor education

facility, renovated visitor information station, and the creation

of a high quality and user friendly resource database. Data

base information could be accessed and used by visitors both

on and off site using the internet or other high technology

media formats.

New visitor center would make it possible to exhibit many of

the objects and manuscripts currently in storage at the

museum preservation facility. This facility would also make it

possible to borrow and interpret Sandburg related resources

from other institutions’ collections in a safe and protected

environment.

Cumulative impacts: Accumulated exposures to humidity, light,

and heat would be reduced and extend the time those objects

and manuscripts can be exhibited would be substantially

increased over the no action and Connemara Lifestyle

alternatives.

No significant negative cumulative impacts to resources

outside park boundaries have been identified for this factor.

Factor: Promotes continued learning and research of Carl

Sandburg.

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the conditions described in

the high criteria. An assessment of exceptional is the most

desirable assessment and indicates that implementing the

alternative would most likely result in a highly desirable,

unique, or beneficial environmental condition readily noticed

by visitors.

 Analysis of Sandburg Center Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

93

This alternative considers building interest in continued

learning and research to local, regional, and worldwide

audiences one of its top priorities. The new visitor center

provides public access to high quality venues that can be used

for interpretation, education, and research programs.

Accommodating large groups or individuals for extended

periods of time is possible. Outside research can be supported

and is encouraged.

This alternative builds on the assumption that Carl Sandburg’s

works are as relevant to contemporary American society today

as they were when first published and that by providing

research, education, and interpretive activities a new

generation of Americans would develop an interest in Carl

Sandburg. As interest builds over time, demand for Sandburg

works may help keep Sandburg works in print.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts to resources outside the park have been identified for

this factor.

Factor: Provides opportunity to link park themes with local,

state, national, and international education programs.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Park education programs in this alternative are conducted

both on and off site with a strong focus on internet based

outreach to a global audience. Park management encourages

partnerships with national and global Sandburg scholars and

institutions to develop education programs. Teacher

workshops are conducted in partnership with universities and

museums staffed by Sandburg scholars. Facilities for

workshops and other education oriented events are available.

Curriculum materials are developed and directed toward a

global audience and conducted in partnership with larger

national initiatives whenever possible.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts to resources outside the park have been identified for

this factor.

Natural Resource Management

This factor describes the potential changes to vegetation that

could result from implementing the Sandburg Center

alternative.

Factor: Potential to preserve existing vegetation

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Use of trails will increase as more visitors come to the park.

While the future physical impact of visitors to vegetation near

trails is difficult to quantify, it is logical to assume that impacts

will increase in proportion to the rise in people using the trails.

Impacts to sensitive vegetation associated with trail system use

would be reduced by tightly controlling access to granite

domes and increasing maintenance and enforcement activities

in heavily affected or sensitive areas.

The construction of new visitor service infrastructure would

result in removal of vegetative cover and cause associated

ground disturbance. Three significant developments are

proposed within the present boundaries of the park in this

alternative.

Parking area expansion: It is expected that enlarging the visitor

parking area would cause the removal of some tree cover in

the vicinity of Front Lake. Grading of the landscape is also

expected as the topography of the site is moderately sloping.

While actual design alternatives and construction

specifications are beyond the scope of this document, it is

estimated that construction activity could impact

approximately 1.25 to 1.5 acres of mixed pine and hardwood

woodland in the visitor services zone.

Approximately 500 to 1000 SF of mixed pine and hardwood

forest would be removed to enlarge the volunteer parking area.

The immediate impacts associated with construction are:

disturbed earth, dust, noise above the ambient, and disarray.

These are short-term impacts that would be gone at the

conclusion of the construction phase and may be reduced

through construction site Best Management Practices. Soil

runoff to Front Lake, Side Lake, and Memminger Creek would

be reduced by interception of surface water flowing over

exposed earth with filter fabric barriers or other appropriate

techniques. Regularly sprinkling vehicle circulation routes with

water would reduce dust. Regular pick up and disposal of litter

and construction debris would reduce the litter problems.

Noise and disarray are short term impacts and would

disappear at the conclusion of the activity. Remaining for the

long term would be additional parking areas and walkways.

Amphitheater relocation: It is expected that relocating the

existing amphitheater to one of the three recommended areas

would cause the removal of tree cover. Grading of the

landscape is expected as the topography is slightly to

moderately sloping at each location. While site design

alternatives and construction specifications are beyond the

scope of this document, it is estimated that construction

activity could impact approximately 5000 SF of mixed pine

and hardwood woodland or pasture in the historic interaction

 Analysis of Sandburg Center Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

94

zone. The immediate impacts associated with construction

are: disturbed earth, dust, noise above the ambient, and

disarray. These are short-term impacts and would disappear

the conclusion of the construction phase. Soil runoff to Front

Lake, Side Lake, and Memminger Creek would be reduced by

interception of surface water flowing over exposed earth with

filter fabric barriers or other appropriate techniques. Regularly

sprinkling vehicle circulation routes with water would reduce

dust. Regular pick up and disposal of litter and construction

debris would reduce the litter problems. Noise and disarray

are short term impacts of the construction process and would

disappear at the conclusion of the activity. Remaining for the

long term would be an amphitheater and associated walkways.

Impacts resulting from the new amphitheater construction

would be reduced by restoring the former site to its historic

condition resulting in no net loss of historic landscape due to

the action.

Expansion of Administrative and Maintenance Facilities:

Enlarging the headquarters and maintenance area would

cause the removal of some tree cover near back road in the

general area of the existing facility. Some grading would occur

as the topography of the site is slightly sloping. While actual

design alternatives and construction specifications are beyond

the scope of this document, it is estimated that construction

activity could impact approximately 1 acre of mixed pine and

hardwood woodland in the park services zone.

The immediate impacts associated with construction are:

disturbed earth, dust, noise above the ambient, and disarray.

These are short-term impacts and would disappear at the

conclusion of construction. Soil runoff to adjacent areas

would be reduced by interception of surface water flowing

over exposed earth with filter fabric barriers or other

appropriate techniques. Regularly sprinkling vehicle

circulation routes with water would reduce dust. Regular pick

up and disposal of litter and construction debris would reduce

the litter problems. Remaining for the long term would be

additional structures, paved surfaces, and graveled surfaces.

Cumulative impacts: The construction of an off site visitor

center may cause the removal of trees at an undetermined

location near the park. Because a potential site has not been

identified, the number of trees potentially removed cannot be

determined. It is assumed that any reduction would

contribute to the overall trend of tree loss in the suburban

landscape surrounding the park. Sensitive design and

construction practices could reduce the impact of potential

tree loss resulting from construction of a visitor center on a

wooded site.

Impact of tree removal due to actions in this alternative could

be reduced by acquiring through purchase or protective

easement wooded property adjacent to the park. Preserving

these properties in their existing condition would protect

more of the suburban landscape from tree removal and

contribute to overall scenic view and boundary protection at

the park.

Park Operations and Administration

Factors in this category describe impacts to park operations

and administration that could result from implementing the

Sandburg Center Alternative.

Factor: Minimizes maintenance and administrative

responsibilities.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

The addition of new staff and facilities would increase

administration and support services responsibilities. It is

anticipated that one additional full time administrative

assistant position would be needed to address the additional

responsibilities.

The addition of new on-site and off-site facilities would

increase maintenance work load. It is anticipated that one

additional full time maintenance positions would be needed to

address the additional responsibilities. Volunteer labor could

help supplement maintenance personnel to a small degree.

Resources management responsibilities increase with the

addition of new facilities, more visitors, and need to

coordinate the NEPA and Section 106 compliance procedures

associated with those proposed developments. It is anticipated

that two additional staff member will be required to fulfill the

increased monitoring and compliance responsibilities.

Volunteers would play an essential role by helping to measure

and document natural and cultural resource conditions on an

ongoing basis.

Additional museum and curatorial staff would be needed to

provide support for interpretive and education programs and

coordinate collection preservation and conservation

treatments resulting from increased access to objects and

manuscripts. It is anticipated that two additional full time

positions would be required to address this need. Volunteer

labor would continue to play a critical role in fulfilling the

preservation responsibilities of the park.

Responsibility of the interpretive staff is significantly increased

in this alternative because of its focus on creating dynamic and

interactive visitor interpretation and education programs. It is

anticipated that two additional full time positions would need

 Analysis of Sandburg Center Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

95

to be added over time to address the increased work load and

staff new facilities. Volunteers would continue to make a very

significant contribution to the interpretive and educational

program efforts of the park.

More visitors, facilities, and land would require the addition of

a full-time law enforcement ranger to properly enforce park

regulations.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Provides additional parking spaces.

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the high criteria. An

assessment of exceptional is the most desirable assessment

and indicates that implementing the alternative would most

likely result in a highly desirable, unique, or beneficial

environmental condition readily noticed by visitors.

Up to 20 extra parking spaces are provided at new visitor

center in addition to those required for operation the facility.

This additional parking capacity will be located within

convenient walking distance of the park and be connected to

the park entrance via a pedestrian pathway. Up to 20

additional parking spaces are created by restriping and

expanding the visitor parking area in the Visitor Services Zone.

Up to 10 additional spaces are created in the volunteer parking

area on the back drive.

Cumulative impacts: Increased parking availability in this

alternative may help reduce traffic congestion near the Park

and Playhouse as some traffic volume would presumably be

diverted to the off site location. Depending on the location of

the new facility, potential exists for a joint parking

arrangement with the Flat Rock Playhouse, or the Village of

Flat Rock that could help resolve the community wide parking

shortage.

Factor: Enhances employee, volunteer, and visitor health and

safety.

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the conditions described in

the high criteria. An assessment of exceptional is the most

desirable assessment and indicates that implementing the

alternative would most likely result in a highly desirable,

unique, or beneficial environmental condition readily noticed

by visitors.

The overall park environment is safe and healthy for

employees, volunteers, and visitors. The implementation of

this alternative is not expected to result in the development of

unsafe or unhealthy conditions over time.

Vehicle and pedestrian interaction in the visitor services zone

would be enhanced by improved circulation patterns

associated with the parking area expansion.

A regular two way flow of pedestrians and vehicles moves

simultaneously between the headquarters and maintenance

buildings and the volunteer parking area for most of the day.

Low vehicle speeds, safety training, and observant employees

reduce the potential for accidents.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Enhances energy conservation or reduces energy

consumption.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Additional on site and off site facilities and program activities

would cause energy consumption to increase. Energy use may

be reduced to a certain degree by using energy saving

technologies when designing and constructing the off site

visitor center .

Potential energy conservation may result from improvements

to parking and circulation in the visitor services zone that

reduce traffic congestion at the park entrance. Improvements

in the transportation system may include some form of public

transportation service possible provided through cooperation

with local governments, private businesses, or support groups.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Quality of Life and the Socioeconomic

Environment

Factors in this category describe impacts to quality of life and

socioeconomic environments that could result from

implementing the Sandburg Center alternative.

Factor: Provides additional opportunities for walking.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

The construction of additional walking trails would occur in

the visitor services zone. Additional trail side amenities are

provided in the visitor service zone. A pedestrian connection

is provided between the off site visitor center and the park

entrance. Connection to the greenway system occurs at the

park entrance.

 Analysis of Sandburg Center Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

96

The NPS would create opportunities for a woodland walking

experience on the 110 undeveloped acres between Big Glassy

and Little River road should the property be purchased.

Cumulative impacts: Additional walking trails in the visitor

services zone, on land acquired in a boundary expansion, and

in conjunction with local community efforts to expand the

greenway system help provide more walking opportunities for

both local residents and park visitors.

Factor: Provides incentives for partnering with local

governments, community groups, and individual citizens.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Park management remains engaged, dedicated, and a willing

member of the local community. It cooperates constructively

on issues of mutual interest and concern and works to

strengthen its traditionally close relationship with friends

support groups, volunteers, and local government officials.

Park management recognizes the high potential for beneficial

partnering relationships but does not rely solely on those

relationships to accomplish management objectives.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factors: Potential economic benefit to community.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

A Sandburg visitor center would attract visitors from a

worldwide audience. Visitors who come to the area to take

advantage of new opportunities at the park are potential

visitors to other regional tourism locations. It is assumed that

length of stay per visitor would increase as the number of

programs and educational opportunities at the park and

visitor center grows. Centrally located visitor center, parking,

and pedestrian walkways could encourage visitors to extend

their stay in the local area to take advantage of multiple park

and private sector tourism and entertainment opportunities.

Overnight stays in the local area could increase in conjunction

with the increase in total visitors and length of stay. Additional

goods and services would be purchased from local businesses

to support increased program, maintenance, and

administrative activities at the park.

Construction activity associated with the alternative would

provide a temporary boost to the local and regional economy.

Approximately 9 permanent and part time employment

opportunities could be created over time.

Potentially removes up to 115 acres from Henderson County

property tax roles over time. Impact of lost property tax

revenue to Henderson County may be reduced through the

Federal Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) program which

would reimburse the county for lost property tax revenue for

a period of five years, through sales tax revenues generated by

the purchase of additional goods and services from local

businesses by visitors, and park purchases of construction and

design services for new park infrastructure.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Summary of adverse effects that cannot be

avoided

These are impacts that cannot be fully mitigated or avoided.

Implementing the Sandburg Center alternative would cause

some tree removal and ground disturbance associated with the

addition of visitor service infrastructure in the visitor services

zone and at an undetermined off site location. While sensitive

design and construction practices and the protection of

undeveloped lands resulting from a boundary expansion

would reduce many of these adverse impacts, some

contribution to the overall trend of higher development

densities in the surrounding community is expected.

Sensitive design and construction practices can also reduce the

visual impact of the new visitor service infrastructure near

Front Lake, however, complete screening of these elements is

not possible and some non-historic elements would be visible

from the front porch of the main house, particularly in the

winter when deciduous trees have lost their foliage.

Summary of irreversible or irretrievable

commitments of resources

Irreversible commitments are those that cannot be reversed,

except perhaps in the extreme long term. Irretrievable

commitments are those that are lost for a period of time.

Irreversible commitments: Historic objects can tolerate only a

finite exposure to heat, humidity, and light before they must be

returned to the museum preservation facility for permanent

storage or major conservation treatment. In the Sandburg

Center alternative, exposure of historic artifacts and

manuscripts to light, heat, and humidity would continue

(particularly in the main house), ultimately resulting in their

removal to the museum preservation facility for permanent

storage. This alternative significantly reduces exposures by

providing several locations where sensitive resources can be

accessed by visitors and researchers in a climate controlled

environment.

 Analysis of Sandburg Center Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

97

Irretrievable commitments: New construction in the visitor

services zone will result in additional walkways, paved parking

areas, and other permanent visitor service infrastructure.

These impacts are considered irreversible in the sense that

other potential use of these resources would be lost for a

significant period of time. The loss is, however, somewhat

reduced by the fact that the majority of the area that could be

developed is a reclaimed road bed that the Sandburgs received

in the late 1950’s through a land trade when the road alignment

of Little River Road was changed.

Relocating the amphitheater will result in vegetation removal,

additional walkways, seating and stage construction, and other

permanent visitor service infrastructure. These impacts are

considered irreversible in the sense that other potential uses of

these resources (including historic preservation) would be lost

for a significant period of time. The loss would be reduced by

restoring the old amphitheater site near the main house to

period of significance condition.

Summary of the relationship between shortterm uses of the environment and

maintenance and enhancement of long-term

productivity

For the purposes of this discussion, short term is defined as

the time span for which this General Management Plan is

expected to be effective (generally assumed to be 15-20 years)

and long term is defined as a period beyond that time.

In the Sandburg Center alternative, the short term benefits of

providing improved visitor services, improved program

capability, and greater public access to information in the

museum collection are facilitated by development of a small

area and the rehabilitation of one or more historic building

interiors.

Assessment of Potential

Environmental Impacts Associated

with the Paths of Discovery

Alternative.

Cultural Resource Management

Factors in this category describe impacts to cultural resources

that could occur as a result of implementing the Paths of

Discovery Alternative.

Factor: Preservation of Historic Building Interiors

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Park management would preserve and restore as many historic

building interiors to the period of significance as practical.

Preserved or restored historic building interiors would be

incorporated into the interpretive program of the park.

Historic structures would not remain vacant or unused.

Additional historic building interiors would not be

rehabilitated for administrative, storage, or maintenance use.

Over time, most administrative and maintenance operations

currently in historic structures would be relocated to the park

services zone, visitor services zone, or a new off site visitor

center. The visitor contact area would remain in the main

house basement and use of the Farm Manger’s Residence

would continue as a ranger residence.

Exteriors of all historic structures would be preserved or

restored to the period of significance over time.

Cumulative Impact: No significant negative cumulative impacts

have been identified for this alternative.

Factor: Introduction of non-period elements to the historic

landscape

Assessment: Negligible – results of implementing the alternative

are notably less than the preferred condition but still exceed

minimum criteria for the factor and do not cause resource

impairment. An assessment of negligible generally indicates

some visitors may perceive an environmental condition

associated with implementation of the alternative as a

distraction, inconvenience, or unfulfilled desire.

Non-historic elements would be evident in an expanded

visitor services zone. Opportunities for visitors to learn about

the Sandburg story would be placed at appropriate locations

along pedestrian pathways. Interpretive waysides and other

non-historic elements would be minimized in the historic

discovery zone.

The following non-historic elements are proposed or present

in the historic landscape for this alternative:

• A non-historic walking trail extending from the visitor

parking area to the back gate would be constructed

between the historic fence line and shoulder of Little River

Road. The trail would be most visible from Little River

Road and the barn area.

• A non-historic walking trail would be constructed parallel

to back drive connecting the new trail on Little River Road

to the barn area. While the trail would be mostly screened

from historic views of the pastures and barn area, its

implementation would likely require the construction of

several small footbridges or boardwalks.

 Analysis of Paths of Discovery Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

98

• Waysides or other interpretive devices would be visible

near trails in the visitor services and historic interaction

zones at a higher frequency than the other alternatives.

The exact number and location for these elements would

be determined in a comprehensive interpretive master

plan, cultural landscape report, trail management plan, or

development concept plan. The visual impact of waysides

could be reduced to some extent by the use of new audio

technologies and designs that minimize the visual impact

of wayside exhibits.

• The existing trailer comfort station near the main house

would be replaced by a sensitively designed new facility of

approximately the same size at the same location. Design

alternatives for the new facility would be developed and

coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Officer as

required by NPS policy.

• The parking and public entrance area on Little River Road

would be redesigned and enlarged to accommodate

additional vehicles. Design alternatives for these

improvements would be proposed in a development

concept plan and coordinated with the State Historic

Preservation Officer and the public as required by NPS

policy.

• Visitor service infrastructure would be enhanced in the

visitor services zone by modifying the visitor information

and comfort station to provide additional interpretive and

information capabilities. The non-historic walking trails in

the visitor services zone would remain and additional

trails would be added. A small area for picnic tables could

be included in the design if desired. Design alternatives for

these improvements would be developed in a

development concept plan and coordinated with the State

Historic Preservation Officer and the public as required by

NPS policy.

• A shuttle vehicle would continue to transport visitors who

need assistance up the steep slope from the parking area

to the main house area. The visual impacts of the

transport vehicle would be reduced by replacing it with a

less visually and audibly intrusive vehicle.

• The existing amphitheater would be replaced by a new

facility constructed at one of the three approved sites

identified in the alternative. The landscape of the old

amphitheater would be restored to period conditions.

• The historic landscape of the park would be maintained

to represent the period of significance as directed in the

zone descriptions of this GMP. Historic landscape

management treatments and implementation procedures

within specific zones would be recommend and

documented in a cultural landscape report or

development concept plan.

• Trail side amenities such as benches and trash receptacles

in the historic interaction zone would be evident but not

in such quantity as to compromise the historic ambiance

of the site. Visible interpretive media, trail side benches,

trash cans and other nonessential visitor services

infrastructure would be removed from the historic

discovery zone.

• The maintenance facility, museum preservation center,

and headquarters building would be enlarged as needed

within the park services zone. All administrative and

maintenance use of historic structures in the historic

interaction and historic discovery zone would be moved

to the park services or visitor services zone over time with

the exception of the visitor contact station in the main

house and the ranger residence in the farm manager’s

residence.

• Volunteers parking area would be expanded by

approximately 1000 SF and redesigned to improve traffic

flow and accessibility.

Cumulative impacts: The proposed construction of a walking

trail along Little River Road, off site visitor center and parking

area could combine with other local developments to further

suburbanize the local area. The NPS can reduce impacts

associated with the proposed changes by incorporating

sensitive design and construction techniques but some

contribution towards the overall trend of suburbanization will

occur. Cumulative impacts to the local landscape could be

reduced by acquiring and protecting additional undeveloped

acreage around the park for view and boundary protection.

Factor: Opportunities for solitude or a contemplative

experience.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Creating convenient access to an improved pedestrian trail

system would likely increase the number of people who come

to the park for a walking experience. During periods of

moderate to high visitation, the addition of trail amenities may

encourage more use of the woodland trail system and limit

opportunities for solitude on the major woodland trails and at

Big Glassy summit as well.

 Analysis of Paths of Discovery Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

99

The potential for historic views to include people, trails, and

interpretive material is increased. These types of non-historic

elements would be most visible looking towards the barn area

from Little River Road and looking over the pastures from the

barn area.

Cumulative impacts: As population increases and the character

of the surrounding community becomes more suburban, fewer

opportunities for solitude and contemplative experiences may

exist outside park boundaries. A reduction in opportunity for

solitude and contemplation at the park would contribute to

this trend. The NPS can reduce cumulative impacts on

solitude by protecting the 110 undeveloped acres between Big

Glassy and Little River road and providing opportunities for a

woodland walking experience there.

Interpretation and Museum Operations

Factors in this category describe impacts related to

interpretation, education, and museum operations that could

occur as a result of implementing the Paths of Discovery

alternative.

Factor: Provides high quality facilities capable of supporting a

variety of interpretation/education/museum programs.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Facilities for interpretation, education, and museum programs

could be provided through partnering opportunities with local

and regional organizations or at an off site visitor center. An

expansion or renovation of the existing visitor information

station in the visitor services zone provides some additional

opportunity on site. New on site amphitheater facility

provides high quality venue for outdoor interpretive programs.

On site educational opportunities are lower than Sandburg

Center Alternative because of fewer on site venues in historic

structures.

Access to park resources for research is improved by providing

an additional safe and appropriate intellectual access point for

scholars, writers, and artists at the off site visitor center.

This alternative makes it more feasible to borrow and exhibit

Sandburg related objects or archives from other collections at

the park.

Cumulative impacts:

Interpretation: No significant negative cumulative impacts on

interpretation are associated with this factor.

Education: No significant negative cumulative impacts on

education are associated with this factor.

Museum: Historic objects can tolerate only a finite amount of

exposure to heat, humidity, and light before they must be

brought back to the museum preservation facility for

permanent storage or major conservation treatment. Objects

would reach their maximum exposure levels at a slower rate if

they are exhibited in the climate controlled environments

provided at the proposed new facilities.

Factor: Provides visitors with opportunities for personal

contact with NPS personnel (staff or trained volunteers).

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

The self-discovery theme of this concept encourages people to

interact with park resources on their own terms as they walk

through the park. Visitors are exposed to the Sandburg story in

ways that encourage them to seek out NPS personnel for

additional information if they desire. High quality personal

interpretation exists on site at the house and barn areas and

off site at the visitor center. Additional contact points are

provided at the visitor information station in the visitor

services zone and at the bookstore in the basement of the

main house.

School based education programs continue to provide

personal contact opportunities on a local and regional scale.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Provides opportunities for public access to museum

collection and related information.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the alternative

would result in conditions which generally satisfy the high

criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would not be

noticed by most visitors.

The number of public intellectual access points for

information contained in the museum collection is greatly

increased by the addition of a new off site visitor center,

renovated visitor information station, and the creation of a

high quality and user friendly resource database. Data base

information could be accessed and used by visitors both on

and off site using the internet or other high tech media

formats. Although the number of on-site access points and

interpretive program activity is lower than the Sandburg

Center alternative, the Paths of Discovery alternative provides

better access to information than existing conditions or the

Connemara Lifestyle alternative

 Analysis of Paths of Discovery Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

100

New visitor center would make it possible to exhibit many of

the objects and manuscripts currently in storage at the

museum preservation facility. This facility would also make it

possible to borrow and interpret Sandburg related resources

from other institutions’ collections in a safe and protected

environment.

Cumulative impacts: Accumulated exposures to humidity, light,

and heat would be reduced and the time those objects and

manuscripts can be exhibited would be substantially increased

over the No Action alternative.

No significant negative cumulative impacts to resources

outside park boundaries have been identified for this factor.

Criteria: More opportunity is preferred. More intellectual

access points are preferred. Minimum standard: Any proposed

implementation strategy would comply with DO-28, NPS

Museum Handbook, and all other applicable NPS museum

policy guidelines.

Factor: Promotes continued learning and research of Carl

Sandburg.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

The new visitor center provides additional opportunity for

interpretation, education, and research programs.

Accommodating large groups or individuals is possible.

Outside research can be supported and is encouraged.

Visitors who use the park primarily for a walking experience

are encouraged to learn more about Sandburg through

exposure to interpretive waysides and other trail side

interpretive elements.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts to resources outside the park have been identified for

this factor.

Factor: Provides opportunity to link park themes with local,

state, national, and international education programs.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Park education programs in this alternative are conducted

both on site and as an outreach program in local schools.

Teacher workshops are conducted both on and off site and

focus on developing a relationship between park and local/

regional education resources. Curriculum materials are

developed in strong partnership with area and regional

educators. Teachers prepare materials for use by other

teachers with direction and assistance provided by park staff.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts to resources outside the park have been identified for

this factor.

Natural Resource Management

The following factor describes the potential changes to

vegetation that could result from implementing the Paths of

Discovery alternative.

Factor: Potential to preserve existing vegetation

Assessment: Negligible – results of implementing the alternative

are notably less than the preferred condition but still exceed

minimum criteria for the factor and do not cause resource

impairment. An assessment of negligible generally indicates

some visitors may perceive an environmental condition

associated with implementation of the alternative as a

distraction, inconvenience, or unfulfilled desire.

New construction activity is the primary cause of vegetation

removal and ground disturbance in the alternative. Minor

vegetation removal associated with normal maintenance

activities would occur. Use of trails will increase as more

visitors come to the park and additional trails are added.

While the future physical impact of visitors to vegetation near

trails is difficult to quantify, it is logical to assume that impacts

will increase in proportion to the rise in people using them.

Impacts to sensitive vegetation associated with trail system use

would be reduced by tightly controlling access to granite

domes and increasing maintenance and enforcement activities

in heavily affected or sensitive areas.

Four significant developments are proposed within the

boundaries of the park that could cause ground disturbance

and the removal of vegetation.

Parking area expansion: It is expected that enlarging the visitor

parking area would cause the removal of some tree cover in

the vicinity of Front Lake. Grading of the landscape is also

expected as the topography of the site is moderately sloping.

While actual design alternatives and construction

specifications are beyond the scope of this document, it is

estimated that construction activity could impact

approximately 1.25 to 1.5 acres of mixed pine and hardwood

woodland in the visitor services zone.

Approximately 500 to 1000 SF of mixed pine and hardwood

forest would be removed to enlarge the volunteer parking area.

The proposed parking sites are adjacent to the existing parking

lot behind Front Lake and off the back drive service drive. The

immediate impacts associated with construction are: disturbed

earth, dust, noise above the ambient, and disarray. These are

 Analysis of Paths of Discovery Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

101

short-term impacts that would be gone at the conclusion of

the construction phase and may be reduced through

construction site Best Management Practices. Soil runoff

would be reduced by interception of surface water flowing

over exposed earth with filter fabric barriers or other

appropriate techniques. Regularly sprinkling vehicle

circulation routes with water would reduce dust. Regular pick

up and disposal of litter and construction debris would reduce

the litter problems. Noise and disarray are short term impacts

and would disappear at the conclusion of the activity.

Remaining for the long term would be additional parking areas

and walkways.

Amphitheater relocation: It is expected that relocating the

existing amphitheater would cause the removal of tree cover.

Grading of the landscape is also expected as the topography is

slightly to moderately sloping at each location. While actual

site design alternatives and construction specifications are

beyond the scope of this document, it is estimated that

construction activity could impact approximately 5000 SF of

mixed pine and hardwood woodland or pasture in the historic

interaction zone. The immediate impacts associated with

construction are: disturbed earth, dust, noise above the

ambient, and disarray. These are short-term impacts that

would be gone at the conclusion of the construction phase

and may be reduced through construction site Best

Management Practices. Soil runoff to Front Lake, Side Lake,

and Memminger Creek would be reduced by interception of

surface water flowing over exposed earth with filter fabric

barriers or other appropriate techniques. Regularly sprinkling

vehicle circulation routes with water would reduce dust.

Regular pick up and disposal of litter and construction debris

would reduce the litter problems. Noise and disarray are short

term impacts and would disappear at the conclusion of the

activity. Remaining for the long term would be an

amphitheater and associated walkways.

Expansion of Administrative and Maintenance Facilities: It is

expected that enlarging the headquarters and maintenance

area would cause the removal of some tree cover near back

road in the general area of the existing facility. Some grading

would be expected as the topography of the site is slightly

sloping. While actual design alternatives and construction

specifications are beyond the scope of this document, it is

estimated that construction activity could impact

approximately 1 acre of mixed pine and hardwood woodland

in the park services zone. The immediate impacts associated

with construction are: disturbed earth, dust, noise above the

ambient, and disarray. These are short-term impacts that

would be gone at the conclusion of the construction phase

and may be reduced through construction site Best

Management Practices. Soil runoff to adjacent areas would be

reduced by interception of surface water flowing over exposed

earth with filter fabric barriers. Regularly sprinkling vehicle

circulation routes with water would reduce dust. Regular pick

up and disposal of litter and construction debris would reduce

the litter problems. Noise and disarray are short term impacts

and would disappear at the conclusion of the activity.

Remaining for the long term would be additional structures,

paved surfaces, and graveled surfaces.

Expansion of visitor services zone and construction of new

interpretive trails: An approximately 3750’ long interpretive

trail connecting the visitor center parking area to the barn area

would be constructed. A 2250’ trail segment of the new trail

from Little River Road to back gate would require substantial

grading and the removal of some grassy vegetation between

the historic fence line and the shoulder of the road. A 1500’

trail segment running parallel to back drive would require

selected tree removal, moderate grading, and the construction

of several small wooden footbridges or boardwalks in the

forested area between back gate and the barn area.

Construction of the new pedestrian trails would occur in the

visitor services zones shown in figure 2-g.

The immediate impacts associated with construction of the

new interpretive trail segments are: disturbed earth, dust, noise

above the ambient, increased traffic delays along Little River

Road, and disarray. These are short-term impacts that would

be gone at the conclusion of the construction phase and may

be reduced through construction site Best Management

Practices. Soil runoff to adjacent areas would be reduced by

interception of surface water flowing over exposed earth with

filter barriers or other appropriate techniques. Regularly

sprinkling vehicle circulation routes with water would reduce

dust. Regular pick up and disposal of litter and construction

debris would reduce the litter problems. Noise and disarray

are short term impacts and would disappear at the conclusion

of the activity. Remaining for the long term would be paved

and unpaved trail surfaces, interpretive waysides, benches,

small footbridges, and boardwalks.

Cumulative impacts: Construction of new trails and a potential

off site visitor center would cause the removal of some trees

and grassy vegetation. It is assumed that any removal of

vegetation would contribute to the overall trend of vegetation

loss in the suburban landscape surrounding the park. Sound

design and construction practices could reduce the impact of

potential vegetation loss resulting from these potential new

developments.

Mitigation of tree loss would be possible if additional nonhistoric property was acquired for view and boundary

protection. Such property, if it ame under management of the

NPS through donation, easement, or fee simple acquisition,

would allow more of the existing suburban landscape to be

protected from vegetation removal as part of the overall view

protection program of the park.

 Analysis of Paths of Discovery Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

102

Criteria: Preservation of existing vegetation is preferred

condition. Minimum standard: Any proposed implementation

strategy would comply with DO-77 and all other applicable

federal policy guidelines. Federal water quality and noise

standards would not be violated as a result of associated

construction activities.

Park Operations and Administration

Factors in this category describe impacts related to park

operations and administration that could occur as a result of

implementing the Paths of Discovery alternative.

Factor: Minimizes maintenance and administrative

responsibilities.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

The addition of new staff and facilities would increase

administration and support services responsibilities. It is

anticipated that one additional full time administrative

assistant position would be needed to address the additional

responsibilities.

Maintenance responsibilities increase due to the addition of

additional interpretive trails and off site facilities. It is

anticipated that one additional full time maintenance position

would need to be added over time to address the increased

work load. Volunteer labor could help supplement the

maintenance function to a small degree.

Resources management responsibilities increase significantly

with the addition of new facilities, new trails, more visitors,

and need to coordinate the NEPA and Section 106 compliance

procedures associated with those proposed developments. It

is anticipated that one additional staff member will be

required to fulfill the increased monitoring and compliance

responsibilities. Volunteers would play an essential role by

helping to measure and document natural and cultural

resource conditions on a regular basis.

The creation of additional intellectual access points at on site

and off site locations and the aging of the museum collection

would increase work load for museum and curatorial staff. It

is anticipated that one additional full time position would be

needed to address the increased work load. This alternative

relies heavily on professional trained volunteer labor to fulfill

the preservation responsibilities of the park.

Responsibility of the interpretive staff is increased by the

addition of the visitor center and to coordinate an expanded

volunteer and friends group. It is anticipated that one

additional position will be needed to address the increased

work load and staff new facilities. Volunteers would continue

to make a very significant contribution to the interpretive and

educational program efforts of the park.

More visitors, facilities, and land would require the addition of

one full-time law enforcement ranger to properly enforce park

regulations.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Provides additional parking spaces.

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the high criteria. An

assessment of exceptional is the most desirable assessment

and indicates that implementing the alternative would most

likely result in a highly desirable, unique, or beneficial

environmental condition readily noticed by visitors.

Up to 20 extra parking spaces are provided at new visitor

center in addition to those required for operation of the

facility. This additional parking capacity will be located within

convenient walking distance of the park and be connected to

the park entrance via a pedestrian pathway. Up to 20

additional parking spaces are created by restriping and

expanding the visitor parking area in the Visitor Services Zone.

Up to 10 additional spaces are created in the volunteer parking

area off the back drive.

Cumulative impacts: Increased parking availability in this

alternative may help reduce traffic congestion near the Park

and Playhouse entrances as some traffic volume would

presumably be diverted to the off site location. Depending on

the location of the new facilities, potential exists for a joint

parking arrangement with the Flat Rock Playhouse or Village

of Flat Rock that could help resolve both the park and

community wide parking shortage.

Factor: Enhances employee, volunteer, and visitor health and

safety.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

The overall park environment is safe and healthy for

employees, volunteers, and visitors. The implementation of

this alternative is not expected to result in the development of

unsafe or unhealthy conditions over time.

Vehicle and pedestrian interaction in the visitor services zone

would be improved by increasing parking capacity in the

visitor’s parking area and providing additional off site parking.

 Analysis of Paths of Discovery Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

103

The addition of a pedestrian trail from the back gate to the

barn area separates vehicle and pedestrian traffic along that

route.

Pedestrian traffic along Little River Road is increased by the

addition of the interpretive trail between the visitor parking

area and back gate. Exposure of pedestrians to traffic on Little

River Road can be reduced by good design and construction

of the trail, improved traffic signage and a reduction of travel

speed on Little River Road.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Enhances energy conservation or reduces energy

consumption.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Additional off site facility would increase energy consumption.

Energy use may be reduced to a certain degree by using energy

saving technologies when designing and constructing the off

site facility.

The Little River Road interpretive trail enhances community

greenway system and encourages more people to leave their

vehicles at a remote parking area and access the park by

bicycle or foot.

Potential energy conservation may result from improvements

to parking and circulation in the visitor services zone that

reduce traffic congestion at the park entrance. Improvements

in the transportation system may include some form of public

transportation service possibly provided through cooperation

with local governments, private businesses, or support groups.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Quality of Life and Socioeconomic

Environment

Factors in this category describe impacts to the quality of life

and socioeconomic environment that could occur as a result

of implementing the Paths of Discovery alternative.

Factor: Provides additional opportunities for walking.

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the high criteria. An

assessment of exceptional is the most desirable assessment

and indicates that implementing the alternative would most

likely result in a highly desirable, unique, or beneficial

environmental condition readily noticed by visitors.

Construction of the 3/4 mile interpretive connector trail would

create a looped trail linking both ends of the existing trail

system. Walking opportunities would be closely integrated

into the community greenway system. An additional

pedestrian access point is created at the back gate. A

pedestrian connection is provided between the visitor center,

its integrated parking area, and the two park entrances.

Additional trail side amenities would be provided in the visitor

service zone.

The NPS would create opportunities for a woodland walking

experience on the 110 undeveloped acres between Big Glassy

and Little River road should the property be purchased.

Cumulative impacts: Additional walking trails in the visitor

services zone, on land acquired in a boundary expansion, and

in conjunction with local community efforts to expand the

greenway system help provide more walking opportunities for

both local residents and park visitors.

Factor: Provides incentives for partnering with local

governments, community groups, and individual citizens.

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the high criteria. An

assessment of exceptional is the most desirable assessment

and indicates that implementing the alternative would most

likely result in a highly desirable, unique, or beneficial

environmental condition readily noticed by visitors.

Park management recognizes that many community goals and

park goals are the same, is proactive in forming partnerships to

address issues of mutual interest, and works to strengthen its

traditionally close relationship with friends support groups,

volunteers, and local government officials. The Paths of

Discovery alternative relies heavily on successful

implementation of partnering opportunities to accomplish

common goals.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factors: Potential economic benefit to community.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Visitors who come to the area to take advantage of new

walking and interpretive opportunities at the park are

potential visitors to other regional tourism locations.

 Analysis of Paths of Discovery Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

104

Centrally located visitor center, parking, and pedestrian

walkways could encourage visitors to extend their stay in the

local area to take advantage of multiple park and private sector

tourism and entertainment opportunities. Overnight stays

could increase in conjunction with the increase in total visitors

and length of stay over time. Additional goods and services

would be purchased from local businesses to support

increased program, maintenance, and administrative activities

at the park.

Construction activity associated with the alternative would

provide a temporary boost to the local and regional economy.

Approximately six permanent and part time employment

opportunities could be created over time.

Potentially removes up to 115 acres from Henderson County

property tax roles over time. Impact of lost property tax

revenue to Henderson County may be reduced through the

Federal Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) program which

would reimburse the county for lost property tax revenue for

a period of five years, through sales tax revenues generated by

the purchase of additional goods and services from local

businesses by visitors, and park purchases of construction and

design services for new park infrastructure.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Summary of adverse effects that cannot be

avoided

These are impacts that cannot be fully mitigated or avoided.

Implementing the Paths of Discovery alternative would cause

some tree removal and ground disturbance associated with the

addition of visitor service infrastructure in the visitor services

zone near Front Lake, between the historic fence line and the

shoulder of Little Rive Road, in the wooded area parallel to

Back Drive, and at an undetermined location for a visitor

center.

While sound design and construction practices and the

protection of undeveloped lands resulting from a boundary

expansion would reduce many of these adverse impacts, some

contribution to the overall trend of higher development

densities in the surrounding community may be expected.

Sound design and construction practices can also reduce the

visual impact of the new visitor service infrastructure near

Front Lake, however, complete screening of these elements is

not possible and some non-historic elements would be visible

from the front porch of the main house, particularly in the

winter when deciduous trees have lost their foliage.

The construction of a connector trail between the historic

fence line and the shoulder of Little River Road would be

visible from several important view points in the park, from

the road itself, and from the private residences on the opposite

side of Little River Road.

Summary of irreversible or irretrievable

commitments of resources

Irreversible commitments are those that cannot be reversed,

except perhaps in the extreme long term. Irretrievable

commitments are those that are lost for a period of time.

Irreversible commitments: Historic objects can tolerate only a

finite amount of exposure to heat, humidity, and light before

they must be returned to the museum preservation facility for

permanent storage or major conservation treatment. In the

Paths of Discovery alternative, exposure of historic artifacts

and manuscripts to light, heat, and humidity would continue

(particularly in the main house), ultimately resulting in their

removal to the museum preservation facility for permanent

storage. However, this alternative significantly reduces

exposures by providing alternative locations where sensitive

resources can be seen in a climate controlled environment

thus increasing the over all length of time historic objects

would be accessible to the public.

Irretrievable commitments: Construction of a connector trail

along Little River Road and Back Drive is considered

irreversible in the sense that other potential uses (including

historic preservation) of these resources would be lost for a

significant period of time.

New construction in the visitor services zone will result in

additional walkways, paved parking areas, and other

permanent visitor service infrastructure. These impacts are

considered irreversible in the sense that other potential use of

these resources would be lost for a significant period of time.

The loss is, however, somewhat reduced by the fact that the

majority of the area that could be developed is a reclaimed

road bed that the Sandburgs received in the late 1950’s through

a land trade when the road alignment of Little River Road was

changed.

Relocating the amphitheater will result in vegetation removal,

additional walkways, seating and stage construction, and other

permanent visitor service infrastructure. These impacts are

considered irreversible in the sense that other potential uses of

these resources would be lost for a significant period of time.

The loss is potentially reduced by restoring the old

amphitheater site to its period of significance condition.

Summary of the relationship between shortterm uses of the environment and

maintenance and enhancement of long-term

productivity

For the purposes of this discussion, short term is defined as

the time span for which this General Management Plan is

 Analysis of Paths of Discovery Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

105

expected be effective (generally assumed to be 15-20 years) and

long term is defined as a period beyond that time.

In the Paths of Discovery alternative, the short term benefits of

providing improved visitor services, an expanded trail system,

improved program capability, and greater public access to

information in the museum collection are facilitated by the

development of a small but very visible portion of the historic

landscape.

Assessment of Potential

Environmental Impacts Associated

With the Connemara Lifestyle

Alternative.

Cultural Resource Management

Factors in this category describe impacts to cultural resources

that could that could result from implementing the

Connemara Lifestyle alternative.

Factor: Preservation of Historic Building Interiors

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

As many historic structures as possible would be restored and

furnished to represent the period of significance. No

additional historic structures would be rehabilitated for park

use. The farm mangers house, garage, and main house

basement would continue to be used for administrative,

educational, or interpretive functions.

Cumulative Impact: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Introduction of non-period elements to the historic

landscape

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Non-historic elements would be evident in an expanded

visitor services zone but visitors would experience a landscape

that closely represents the historic scene as it existed during

the Sandburg residency.

Non-historic elements introduced into the historic interaction

zone would be minimized. Visitors would be able to

experience a historic landscape as true to the period of

significance as practical. Visible interpretive media, trail side

benches, trash cans and other nonessential visitor services

infrastructure would be removed from the historic discovery

zone.

The following non-historic elements are proposed or present

in the historic landscape for this alternative:

• The historic landscape of the park would be maintained

as close to the period of significance as practical. Site

specific historic landscape management and

implementation procedures within specific zones would

be recommended and documented in a cultural landscape

report or development concept plan.

• The existing trailer comfort station near the main house

would be replaced by a sensitively designed new facility of

approximately the same size at the same location. Design

alternatives for the new facility would be developed and

coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Officer as

required by NPS policy.

• The parking and public entrance area on Little River Road

would be redesigned and enlarged to accommodate

additional vehicles. Design alternatives for these

improvements would be proposed in a development

concept plan and coordinated with the State Historic

Preservation Officer and the public as required by NPS

policy.

• Visitor service infrastructure would be enhanced in the

visitor services zone by modifying the visitor information

and comfort station to provide additional interpretive and

information capabilities. The non-historic walking trails in

the visitor services zone would remain and additional

trails could be added. A small area for picnic tables could

be included in the design if desired. Design of proposed

improvements would be detailed in a development

concept plan and coordinated with the State Historic

Preservation Officer and the public as required by NPS

policy.

• A shuttle vehicle would continue to transport visitors who

need assistance up the steep slope from the parking area

to the main house area. The visual impacts of the

transport vehicle would be reduced by replacing it with a

less visually and audibly intrusive vehicle.

• The existing amphitheater would be replaced by a new

facility constructed at one of the three approved sites

identified in the alternative.

• The maintenance facility, museum preservation facility,

and headquarters building could be enlarged as needed

within the park services zone.

• Volunteers parking area would not be enlarged but could

be redesigned to improve traffic flow and accessibility.

 Analysis of Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

106

Cumulative impacts: Suburban growth pressures would result

in new developments, some of which would be visible to the

historic landscape within the park.

Factor: Opportunities for solitude or a contemplative

experience.

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the high criteria. An

assessment of exceptional is the most desirable assessment

and indicates that implementing the alternative would most

likely result in a highly desirable, unique, or beneficial

environmental condition readily noticed by visitors.

Opportunities for visitors to experience solitude or have a

contemplative experience continue to be common along the

wooded trails, at Big Glassy overlook, and in the pasture areas

year around except during the highest of peak visitation days.

Such experiences occur in the main house and barn areas of

the park during periods of low visitation.

During periods of moderate to high visitation, lack of trail

amenities may discourage some casual use of the Big Glassy

Trail and provide more opportunities for solitude along the

trail and at the summit than the other alternatives.

Cumulative impacts: As the character of the surrounding

community becomes more suburban, fewer opportunities for

solitude and contemplative experiences would exist outside

park boundaries. The local greenway may reduce this impact

to a certain degree if it is funded and constructed to

completion.

Interpretation and Museum Operations

Factors in this category describe impacts related to

interpretation, education, and museum operations that could

result from implementing the Connemara Lifestyle Alternative.

Factor: Provides high quality facilities capable of supporting a

variety of interpretation/education/museum programs.

Assessment: Negligible – results of implementing the alternative

are notably less than the preferred condition but still exceed

minimum criteria for the factor and do not cause resource

impairment. An assessment of negligible generally indicates

some visitors may perceive an environmental condition

associated with implementation of the alternative as a

distraction, inconvenience, or unfulfilled desire.

Interpretation: The new amphitheater, main house, and barn

area continue to serve as venues for tour and performancetype interpretive experiences. Opportunities for growth of

dynamic and interactive interpretive programs is limited by size

and location conflicts at both the amphitheater and barn

areas. The house garage remains the only facility capable of

accommodating an indoor lecture-type interpretive program.

Because indoor program space is limited, scheduling conflicts

occur during periods of inclement weather. Informal learning

experiences continue to occur at the horse barn and

amphitheater, weather permitting. Outdoor educational

experiences are available. Opportunities for additional

dynamic and interactive education programs is limited in this

alternative.

Museum: Original historic objects associated with the

Sandburgs can be viewed at the main house (household and

professional objects), woodshed (farm equipment), barn

garage (farm vehicles), and shaving shed (farm equipment)

and other structures as they are restored. Historic objects

continue to degrade because of damaging changes in humidity,

temperature, and light at all of these locations. New

restorations would be furnished with reproduction or period

objects in instances where climate control was not practical.

Museum preservation facility provides climate controlled

storage or conservation treatment for objects but is not large

enough or otherwise suitable for public viewing and

interpretation of historic objects. Many historic objects

remain inaccessible to the general public while they are in the

museum preservation facility because no suitable protected

environment exists where they can be used as a resource for

research or interpretation purposes.

Cumulative impacts:

Interpretation: No significant negative cumulative impacts on

interpretation are associated with this factor.

Education: No significant negative cumulative impacts on

education are associated with this factor.

Museum: Historic objects can tolerate only a finite amount of

exposure to heat, humidity, and light before they must be

brought back to the museum preservation facility for

permanent storage or major conservation treatment. As

historic objects in this alternative would continue to be

exhibited in an uncontrolled climatic environment,

degradation would accumulate more quickly than if they were

exhibited in a controlled climatic environment. Objects that

have reached their maximum exposure levels would need to be

removed from exhibit status if park managers wish to avoid

permanent resource damage.

Factor: Provides visitors with opportunities for personal

contact with NPS personnel (staff or trained volunteers).

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

The park continues to provide high quality on-site personal

interpretation to visitors on a regular basis at the main house

 Analysis of Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

107

and barn area locations. School-based education programs

are provided for students in local schools.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Provides opportunities for public access to museum

collection and related information.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

The potential number of public intellectual access points is

increased by creating a high quality and user friendly resource

database. Database information could be accessed and used

by visitors both on and off site using the internet or other high

tech media formats.

Expansion of visitor information facility provides a small

climate controlled area where visitors can view historic

objects. Visitors may view historic objects at the main house,

barn garage, woodshed, milk house, and shaving shed. Many

of Carl Sandburg’s personal possessions are exhibited at the

main house and available for public access only by

participating in the guided tour.

A significant number of historic objects and almost all of the

historic archives are stored in the museum preservation facility

and can be accessed only by appointment with the curatorial

staff.

Cumulative impacts: Accumulated exposures to humidity, light,

and heat would necessitate the removal of some objects and

manuscripts to the museum preservation facility for

permanent storage. As more objects are moved over time,

public access to information in the museum collection would

be reduced. Presumably, this impact could be partially reduced

by replacing removed historic objects with reproduction or

period objects.

No significant negative cumulative impacts to resources

outside park boundaries have been identified for this factor.

Factor: Promotes continued learning and research of Carl

Sandburg.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Opportunity to expand continued learning and research

activities to a larger audience is limited by lack of adequate

support facilities. Outside research is supported to the extent

possible by the existing curatorial and interpretation staff.

Accommodating large groups or individuals for extended

periods of time is not possible. On-line data base allows some

remote research to occur.

Cumulative impacts: Many people who are interested in Carl

Sandburg and his works today lived during the time when he

was actively writing and lecturing. As this population ages,

fewer people would be available to introduce a younger and

more diverse audience to the author’s works. Even though

many of Carl Sandburg’s works are as relevant to

contemporary American society today as they were when first

published, fewer and fewer people would be exposed to his

writings. This alternative assumes that interest in continued

learning and research would decline in cumulative fashion

over time. The manifestations of this trend are already being

felt as the number of Sandburg works going out of print

increases each year.

No significant negative cumulative impacts to resources

outside park boundaries have been identified for this factor.

Factor: Provides opportunity to link park themes with local,

state, national, and international education programs.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Park education programs continue to be conducted primarily

on site. Park themes are successfully integrated into local

education programs directly by park staff with some assistance

by area educators. Teacher workshops are conducted on-site

and focus on park resources. Curriculum materials are

developed by park staff with assistance from local educators.

The full potential for state, national, and international

education programs is not fully realized.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Natural Resource Management

This factor describes the potential changes to vegetation that

could result from implementing the Connemara Lifestyle

alternative.

Factor: Potential to preserve existing vegetation

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

 Analysis of Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

108

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Use of trails will increase as more visitors come to the park.

While the future physical impact of visitors to vegetation near

trails is difficult to quantify, it is logical to assume that impacts

will increase in proportion to the rise in people using the trails.

Impacts to sensitive vegetation associated with trail system use

would be reduced by tightly controlling access to granite

domes and increasing maintenance and enforcement activities

in heavily affected or sensitive areas.

The construction of new visitor service infrastructure would

result in removal of vegetative cover and cause associated

ground disturbance. Three developments are proposed within

the present boundaries of the park in this alternative.

Parking area expansion: It is expected that enlarging the visitor

parking area and expanding the visitor information station

would cause the removal of some tree cover in the vicinity of

Front Lake and behind the existing visitor information station.

Grading of the landscape is also expected as the topography of

the site is moderately sloping. While actual design alternatives

and construction specifications are beyond the scope of this

document, it is estimated that construction activity could

impact approximately 1.25 to 1.5 acres of mixed pine and

hardwood woodland in the visitor services zone.

The immediate impacts associated with construction are:

disturbed earth, dust, noise above the ambient, and disarray.

These are short-term impacts that would be gone at the

conclusion of the construction phase and may be reduced

through construction site Best Management Practices. Soil

runoff to Front Lake and Memminger Creek would be

reduced by interception of surface water flowing over exposed

earth with filter fabric barriers or other appropriate

techniques. Regularly sprinkling vehicle circulation routes with

water would reduce dust. Regular pick up and disposal of litter

and construction debris would reduce the litter problems.

Noise and disarray are short term impacts and would

disappear at the conclusion of the activity. Remaining for the

long term would be additional parking areas and walkways.

Amphitheater relocation: It is expected that relocating the

existing amphitheater to one of the three recommended areas

would cause the removal of tree cover. Grading of the

landscape is expected as the topography is slightly to

moderately sloping at each location. While site design

alternatives and construction specifications are beyond the

scope of this document, it is estimated that construction

activity could impact approximately 5000 SF of mixed pine

and hardwood woodland or pasture in the historic interaction

zone. The immediate impacts associated with construction

are: disturbed earth, dust, noise above the ambient, and

disarray. These are short-term impacts that would be gone at

the conclusion of the construction phase and may be reduced

through construction site Best Management Practices. Soil

runoff to Front Lake, Side Lake, and Memminger Creek would

be reduced by interception of surface water flowing over

exposed earth with filter fabric barriers or other appropriate

techniques. Regularly sprinkling vehicle circulation routes with

water would reduce dust. Regular pick up and disposal of litter

and construction debris would reduce the litter problems.

Noise and disarray are short term impacts and would

disappear at the conclusion of the activity. Remaining for the

long term would be an amphitheater and associated walkways.

Expansion of Administrative and Maintenance Facilities: It is

expected that enlarging the headquarters and maintenance

area could cause the removal of some tree cover in the general

area of the existing facility. Some grading would be expected as

the topography of the site is slightly sloping. While actual

design alternatives and construction specifications are beyond

the scope of this document, it is estimated that construction

activity could impact about 1 acre of mixed pine and

hardwood woodland in the park services zone.

The immediate impacts associated with construction are:

disturbed earth, dust, noise above the ambient, and disarray.

These are short-term impacts that would be gone at the

conclusion of the construction phase and may be reduced

through construction site Best Management Practices. Soil

runoff to adjacent areas would be reduced by interception of

surface water flowing over exposed earth with filter fabric

barriers or other appropriate techniques. Regularly sprinkling

vehicle circulation routes with water would reduce dust.

Regular pick up and disposal of litter and construction debris

would reduce the litter problems. Noise and disarray are short

term impacts and would disappear at the conclusion of the

activity. Remaining for the long term would be additional

structures, paved surfaces, and graveled surfaces.

Cumulative impacts: Vegetation removal associated with

expanding visitor parking would contribute to the overall

trend of vegetation loss in the suburban landscape

surrounding the park. Sound design and construction

practices could reduce the impact of potential vegetation loss

resulting from these potential new developments.

Significant mitigation would be possible if legislation

increasing the authorized boundary of the park was approved.

Additional non-historic property acquired for view and

boundary protection would allow more of the existing

suburban landscape to be protected from tree removal.

Park Operations and Administration

Factors in this category describe impacts to park operations

and administration that could result from implementing the

Connemara Lifestyle alternative.

 Analysis of Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

109

Factor: Minimizes maintenance and administrative

responsibilities.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Administration and support services personnel continue to

provide adequate supervisory management and/or

administrative support for park personnel and activities

without increasing staff levels.

Maintenance staff continues to perform all of the maintenance

responsibilities associated with the park. Current staffing

levels are unchanged. Volunteer labor supplements the

maintenance function to a small degree.

Resources management staff continues to fulfill its

responsibilities for NEPA and Section 106 compliance, safety

management, law enforcement, natural and cultural resource

inventory and monitoring without additional staff. More

visitors cause work load to increase gradually over time but

staff is able to cope by limiting its operation to the most

essential functions and improving efficiency through new

technology.

The creation of additional intellectual access points and the

aging of the museum collection would increase work load for

museum and curatorial staff. It is anticipated that one

additional full time position would be needed to address the

increased work load. This alternative relies heavily on

volunteer labor to fulfill the preservation responsibilities of the

park.

The park interpretive staff continues to provide high quality

visitor interpretation and education services to people on site

and in the local community. It is anticipated that one

additional full time position would be needed to address the

increased work load. Volunteers continue to make a critical

contribution to the interpretive and educational program

efforts of the park.

More visitors and land would require the addition of a fulltime law enforcement ranger to properly enforce park

regulations.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Provides additional parking spaces.

Assessment: Exceptional – results of implementing the

alternative clearly meet and exceed the high criteria. An

assessment of exceptional is the most desirable assessment

and indicates that implementing the alternative would most

likely result in a highly desirable, unique, or beneficial

environmental condition readily noticed by visitors.

Up to 30 additional parking spaces are provided at new

parking area located wthin convenient walking distance of the

park and are connected to the park entrance via a pedestrian

pathway. Up to 20 additional parking spaces are created by

restriping and expanding the visitor parking area in the Visitor

Services Zone. Up to 10 additional spaces are created in the

volunteer parking area off the back drive.

Cumulative impacts: Increased parking availability in this

alternative may help reduce traffic congestion near the Park

and Playhouse entrances but does not contribute significantly

to the community wide parking shortage.

Factor: Enhances employee, volunteer, and visitor health and

safety.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

The overall park environment is safe and healthy for

employees, volunteers, and visitors. The implementation of

this alternative is not expected to result in the development of

unsafe or unhealthy conditions over time.

Vehicle and pedestrian interaction in the visitor services zone

would be enhanced by improved circulation patterns

associated with the parking area expansion. Additional

parking may keep some visitors from parking on the shoulder

of Little River Road, but it is unlikely to be able to

accommodate parking volume during periods of high

visitation.

A regular two way flow of pedestrians and vehicles moves

simultaneously between the headquarters and maintenance

buildings and the volunteer parking area most of the day. Low

vehicle speeds, safety training, and observant employees

reduce the potential for accidents.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factor: Enhances energy conservation or reduces energy

consumption.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

 Analysis of Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

110

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Additional on site facilities would cause energy consumption

to increase. Energy use may be reduced to a certain degree by

using energy saving design and construction technologies.

Potential energy conservation may result from improvements

to parking and circulation in the visitor services zone that

reduce traffic congestion at the park entrance.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Quality of Life and Socioeconomic

Environment

Factors in this category describe impacts to the quality of life

and socioeconomic environment that could occur as a result

of implementing the Connemara Lifestyle alternative.

Factor: Provides additional opportunities for walking.

Assessment: Minor – results of implementing the alternative do

not satisfy conditions described in the high criteria for the

factor but clearly exceed minimum criteria and fall well short

of resource impairment. An assessment of minor is a neutral

assessment acknowledging a less than optimum environmental

condition that can be successfully managed to minimize its

impact on visitor experience or resource protection goals.

Opportunities to walk for exercise are available. Construction

of additional walking trails is possible in the visitor services

zone but is not a management priority for the future. Trail side

amenities remain at existing levels and connection to the

greenway system occurs at the park entrance.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor. Local greenway system

helps reduce some of the impact of not expanding walking

opportunities for local residents in the park.

Factors: Provides incentives for partnering with local

governments, community groups, and individual citizens.

Assessment: Moderate – an assessment of moderate is a

positive assessment indicating that implementing the

alternative would result in conditions which generally satisfy

the high criteria for the factor, but do so in a way that would

not be noticed by most visitors.

Park management remains engaged, dedicated, and a willing

member of the local community. It cooperates constructively

on issues of mutual interest and concern and works to

strengthen its traditionally close relationship with friends

support groups, volunteers, and local government officials.

Park management recognizes the high potential for beneficial

partnering relationships but does not rely solely on those

relationships to accomplish management objectives.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Factors: Potential economic benefit to community.

Assessment: Negligible – results of implementing the alternative

are notably less than the preferred condition but still exceed

minimum criteria for the factor and do not cause resource

impairment. An assessment of negligible generally indicates

some visitors may perceive an environmental condition

associated with implementation of the alternative as a

distraction, inconvenience, or unfulfilled desire.

The park contributes to the local economy by attracting

tourists, providing permanent and part time employment

opportunities, and by purchasing goods and services from

local suppliers. As the number of visitors to the site increases

over time, economic benefits attributed to that increase would

be apparent. It is assumed that length of stay per visitor would

remain relatively unchanged. Overnight stays could increase

slightly in conjunction with the increase in total visitors over

time.

Potentially removes up to 25 acres from Henderson County

property tax roles over time. Impact of lost property tax

revenue to Henderson County may be reduced through the

Federal Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) program which

would reimburse the county for lost property tax revenue for

a period of five years, through sales tax revenues generated by

the purchase of additional goods and services from local

businesses by visitors, and park purchases of construction and

design services for new park infrastructure.

Cumulative impacts: No significant negative cumulative

impacts are associated with this factor.

Summary of adverse effects that cannot be

avoided

These are impacts that cannot be fully mitigated or avoided.

Exposure of historic artifacts and manuscripts to light, heat,

and humidity would continue, ultimately resulting in their

removal to the museum preservation facility for permanent

storage. Such impacts would be more significant in this

alternative than the Sandburg Center alternative and Paths of

Discovery alternative because fewer climate controlled

environments are proposed to provide public access and less

significant than the No Action alternative because some

additional climate controlled space is proposed as part of the

visitor information station renovation.

Summary of irreversible or irretrievable

commitments of resources

Irreversible commitments are those that cannot be reversed,

except perhaps in the extreme long term. Irretrievable

commitments are those that are lost for a period of time.

 Analysis of Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 
C h a p t e r F o u r  Environmental Impacts

111

Historic objects can tolerate only a finite amount of exposure

to heat, humidity, and light before they must be returned to the

museum preservation facility for permanent storage or major

conservation treatment. In the Connemara Lifestyle

alternative, exposure of historic artifacts and manuscripts to

light, heat, and humidity would continue (particularly in the

main house), ultimately resulting in their removal to the

museum preservation facility for permanent storage. However,

this alternative somewhat reduces exposures by providing a

small alternative location in the renovated visitor information

station where sensitive resources can be seen in a climate

controlled environment.

Irretrievable commitments: New construction in the visitor

services zone will result in additional walkways, paved parking

areas, and other permanent visitor service infrastructure.

These impacts are considered irreversible in the sense that

other potential use of these resources would be lost for a

significant period of time. The loss is, however, somewhat

reduced by the fact that the majority of the area that could be

developed is a reclaimed road bed that the Sandburgs received

in the late 1950’s through a land trade when the road alignment

of Little River Road was changed.

Relocating the amphitheater will result in vegetation removal,

additional walkways, seating and stage construction, and other

permanent visitor service infrastructure. These impacts are

considered irreversible in the sense that other potential uses of

these resources (including historic preservation) would be lost

for a significant period of time. The loss is potentially reduced

by restoring the old amphitheater site to its period of

significance condition.

Summary of the relationship between shortterm uses of the environment and

maintenance and enhancement of long-term

productivity

For the purposes of this discussion, short term is defined as

the time span for which this General Management Plan is

expected to be effective (generally assumed to be 15-20 years)

and long term is defined as a period beyond that time.

In the Connemara Lifestyle alternative, short term

opportunities to reach a broader audience, create new

interpretive venues, and promote access to the museum

collection are limited in order to reduce additional resource

management responsibility and long term financial

commitment.

 Analysis of Connemara Lifestyle Alternative 

C h a p t e r F i v e  C o n s u l t a t i o n a n d C o o r d i n a t i o n

113

History of Public Involvement

Public participation in the scoping and alternatives development

phases of this Draft General Management Plan/Environmental

Impact Statement has been thorough and comprehensive.

Scoping was initiated with a series of open house and focus

group meetings in the Summer 1999. Ongoing consultations

and briefings have occurred regularly thereafter. Our consulting

partners include Sandburg relatives; the NC State Historic

Preservation Officer; federal, state, and local government

agencies; park neighbors; local political leaders; local business

leaders; friends groups; and public interest organizations. The

plan has been covered extensively in the local print media and

an internet site was created to facilitate a dialogue with persons

outside of the local area (www.nps.gov/carl/gmp_info.htm).

Three NPS newsletters (6/99, 10/99, 10/01), three series of public

meetings hosted by NPS (6/22-24/99, 11/9/99, 10/30/01), two

public meetings hosted by the Flat Rock Village Council

(4/16/02, 6/19/02), and more than 20 special presentations were

delivered to a wide variety of public and private audiences.

Recommendations and comments received during scoping

played a central role in creating this plan. A summary and

discussion of how they influenced the planning process can be

found in Chapter One.

Draft GMP/EIS Public Review and

Comment Period

Comments on this draft GMP/EIS will be accepted for a 60 day

period. Representatives of the National Park Service will be

available at several public meetings during the comment period

to receive input from the public related to the document.

Public notice of the specific dates, times, and locations of the

meetings and the closing date for the official comment period

will be provided by mail, announced in local media, and posted

on the internet at http://www.nps.gov/carl/gmp_info.htm.

CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

CHAPTER FIVE

Persons wishing to submit comments about the draft GMP/EIS

by U.S. Mail should forward them to:

Connie Hudson Backlund, Superintendent

Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

1928 Little River Road

Flat Rock, North Carolina 28731

Persons wishing to submit comments about the draft GMP/EIS

by electronic mail should forward them to the following e-mail

address: carl_superintendent@nps.gov

Additional copies of the draft GMP/EIS or more information

about public meetings and the official comment period may be

obtained by:

writing the Superintendent at the above address

writing the Superintendent at the above e-mail address

telephone request - please call 828-693-4178

visiting the project website - please point your internet

browser to http://www.nps.gov/carl/gmp_info.htm

NPS policy on disclosure and anonymity for

comments about planning documents.

Please note that it is the practice of the National Park Service to

make comments, including names and addresses of respondents

available for public review during regular business hours. If you

wish to withhold your name and/or address, you must state this

prominently at the beginning of your comment. It is the policy

of the National Park Service not to consider anonymous

comments.

The National Park Service will make all submissions from

organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying

themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or

businesses available for public inspection in their entirety.
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  General Management Plan

114

General Management Planning Team

Personnel

NPS Personnel contributing to this project function as planning

team members or technical advisors. Generally, the

responsibility of planning team members includes active

participation in the analysis, development, and decision making

processes of the project. It entails a higher level of commitment

in time and resources than being a technical advisor. The

planning team relies on technical advisors to provide in-depth

professional and technical consultation on specific topics

identified during the planning process.

NPS Planning Team Members

Connie Hudson Backlund - Superintendent, Carl Sandburg

Home National Historic Site, NPS

Tim Bemisderfer - Planning Team Leader, Planning and

Compliance Division, Southeast Regional Office, NPS

John Fischer - Park Planner, Planning and Compliance

Division, Southeast Regional Office, NPS

Sue Jennings, former Chief of Resources Management, Big

South Fork NRRA, NPS

Lucy Lawliss, Lead, Park Cultural Landscapes Program,

Cultural Resources Stewardship and Partnerships,

Washington Service Office, NPS

David Libman - Park Planner, Planning and Compliance

Division, Southeast Regional Office, NPS

Patty Lockamy, N.C. Interpretive Specialist, Blue Ridge

Parkway, NPS

Carol McBryant, former Chief of Visitor Services, Carl

Sandburg Home National Historic Site, NPS

Warren Weber, Chief of Resources Management, Carl

Sandburg Home National Historic Site, NPS

NPS Technical Advisors

John Beck, Interpretive Planner, Division of Interpretation,

Southeast Regional Office, NPS

Allen Bonhert, Chief of Curatorial Services, Cultural

Resources Stewardship, Southeast Regional Office, NPS

Susan Hitchcock, Landscape Architect, Cultural Resources

Stewardship, Southeast Regional Office, NPS

Gary Johnson, Chief, Resource Planning Division, Blue

Ridge Parkway, NPS

Bill Lane, Landscape Architect, Division of Rivers, Trails,

and Conservation Assistance, Southeast Regional Office,

NPS

Richard Ramsden, Chief, Architecture Division, Southeast

Regional Office, NPS

NPS Technical Advisors (continued)

Debbie Rehn, Architect, Architecture Division, Southeast

Regional Office, NPS

Laura Rotegard, Community Planner, Blue Ridge Parkway,

NPS

Lynn Savage, Museum Curator, Carl Sandburg Home

National Historic Site, NPS

Ron Thoman, former Superintendent, Carl Sandburg Home

National Historic Site, NPS

Gordon Wissinger, Chief Ranger, Blue Ridge Parkway, NPS

List of Recipients of Draft Document

North Carolina Congressional Delegation

Hon. Charles H. Taylor

Hon. John Edwards

Hon. Jesse Helms

Federal Departments, Agencies, and Offices

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

Department of Agriculture

- Natural Resources Conservation Service

- Pisgah National Forest

Department of Defense

- Army Corps of Engineers

Department of Interior

- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

- National Park Service

- Blue Ridge Parkway

- Cumberland Piedmont Network

State of North Carolina

North Carolina General Assembly

- Hon. Larry Justus

- Hon. Trudi Walend

- Hon. Robert C. Carpenter

- Hon. Dan Robinson

Department of Commerce

- Division of Community Assistance

Department of Cultural Resources

- Division of Archives and History

- State Historic Preservation Office

- N.C. State Historical Sites

- Thomas Wolfe Memorial

 Planning Team 
C h a p t e r F i v e  C o n s u l t a t i o n a n d C o o r d i n a t i o n

115

State of North Carolina (continued)

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

- Division of Parks and Recreation

- N.C. State Parks

Department of Transportation

N.C. State Forest Resources

Blue Ridge Community College

State of Illinois

Carl Sandburg Birthplace

Carl Sandburg College

Sandburg Days Festival

University of Illinois Library

- Rare Book and Special Collection

Henderson County

Apple Country Greenway Commission

Blue Ridge Fire and Rescue

Board of Commissioners

Emergency Management

Land of Sky Regional Council

Parks and Recreation

Planning Department

Public Library

Public Schools

Historic Johnson Farm

Sheriff’s Department

Travel and Tourism

Valley Hill Fire Department

Village of Flat Rock

Mayor and Village Council

Planning Board

Greenway Committee

City of Hendersonville

Mayor and City Council

Planning Department

Town of Fletcher

Mayor and Town Council

Town of Laurel Park

Mayor and Town Council

Organizations

Art League of Henderson County

Arts Center of Henderson County, Inc.

Blue Ridge Mountain Host

Carolina Mountain Land Conservancy

Community Foundation of Henderson County

Conservation Trust of North Carolina

Designing Our Future

Eastern National

Environmental and Conservation Organization of

Hennderson County

Flat Rock Playhouse

Friends of Carl Sandburg at Connemara

Greater Hendersonville Chamber of Commerce

Handmade in America

Henderson County Arts Council

Historic Flat Rock, Inc.

Mountain Area Cultural Resources Emergency Network

National Parks Conservation Association

National Park Foundation

National Park Trust

Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere

The Nature Conservancy

Trust for Public Land

Village of Flat Rock Merchant’s Association

Western North Carolina Alliance

Individuals

This document is also being distributed to individuals on a

mailing list maintained at the park and through the project

internet site.

 Planning Partners and Consultants 

A p p e n d i x A  A u t h o r i z i n g L e g i s l a t i o n

117

APPENDIX A

AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION

A p p e n d i x B  A m p h i t h e a t e r R e l o c a t i o n

119

Summary of Assessment Process

Identifying suitable sites for relocating the amphitheater was

a significant planning issue identified during scoping. Figure

B-1 identifies six potential relocation sites and the existing

location considered by the planning team in the analysis.

The process used to assess the potential amphitheater sites

was similar to the alternatives assessment process. A range of

potential environmental impact issues was identified during

scoping, consolidated, and restated as factors. A minimum

standard was established for each factor when appropriate.

The planning team then assessed each alternative location for

its ability to achieve the most preferred condition of each

factor. Selection of a preferred alternative was accomplished

by measuring the difference between assessments for each

factor among the alternatives. A most important advantage

was selected from the compiled list of advantages and

assigned a score of 100. The remaining advantages were then

given importance values relative to the most important

advantage and totals were compiled for each alternative.

The three highest scoring alternatives are recommended for

consideration in the plan to allow site designers some

flexibility should unknown underground rock formations or

other unexpected site characteristics make one or more

alternatives not feasible. A more detailed site analysis would

be conducted as part of a Development Concept Plan to

identify one site for development. Only one of the potential

relocation sites may be used. Subsequent to relocation, PMZs

for the remaining relocation sites will be treated identically to

the PMZ that surrounds it and the existing site restored to its

historic appearance

Scale of Assessment

The scale of assessment used to measure each factor was

determined based on the type of data available. Factors

whose attributes could be quantified used numeric

measurements (objective data) to describe them. Factors

whose attributes could only be described using subjective

data relied upon extensive site observations and discussion to

assign a high-medium-low-very low value.

Factors and Criteria

An overview of factors and related criteria is presented in the

following paragraphs.

Factor: Proximity to visitor parking area

Criteria: Adjacent is most preferred condition, closer is more

preferred over more distant

Scale of Assessment: Numeric measurement

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Factor: Proximity to nearest restroom

Criteria: Adjacent is most preferred condition, closer is more

preferred over more distant

Scale of Assessment: Numeric measurement

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Factor: Anticipated amount of grading required

Criteria: No grading is preferred condition.

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means more grading required.

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Factor: Anticipated intrusion of sound and light on

park neighbors

Criteria: No intrusion is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means more intrusion is anticipated

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

AMPHITHEATER RELOCATION

APPENDIX B
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

120

Factor: Amount of natural shade present at site

Criteria: Shaded from sun all day is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means shade is abundant

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Factor: Proximity and convenience to main house

area

Criteria: Closer is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Numeric measurement

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Factor: Anticipated intrusion of program activities on

house tour

Criteria: No intrusion is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means more intrusion is anticipated

Minimum standard: Existing conditions

Factor: Anticipated visibility of site from front porch

of main house

Criteria: Not visible is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means more visibility

Minimum standard: No minimum condition

Factor: Anticipated visibility of site from barn area

Criteria: Not visible is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means more visibility

Minimum standard: No minimum condition

Factor: Anticipated visibility of site from bench near

visitor contact station at front lake

Criteria: Not visible is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means more visibility

Minimum standard: No minimum condition

Factor: Anticipated visibility of site from Little River

Road

Criteria: Not visible is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means more visibility

Minimum standard: No minimum condition

Factor: Anticipated intrusion on visitor experience

when walking up entrance trail

Criteria: No intrusion is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means more intrusion

Minimum standard: No minimum condition

Factor: Ability of emergency and service vehicles to

access site

Criteria: Fast and convenient access on a paved road

without the need for excessive turning is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Factor: Vulnerability to unauthorized use and

vandalism

Criteria:Farther from nearest authorized or unauthorized

point of entry is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Numeric - based on number of

minutes it takes to walk from nearest entry point

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Factor: Need to remove existing vegetation, especially

trees and shrubs

Criteria: No vegetation removal is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective - A high attribute means

several mature trees would be removed

Minimum standard: No minimum standard
A p p e n d i x B

 A m p h i t h e a t e r R e l o c a t i o n

121

Potential Amphitheater Locations

Note: Scale is approximate North

FEET

0 250 500

Sites Considered in Analysis

Front Lake Side Lake

Little River Road 

Park Headquarters 

and Maintenance Area

Volunteer

Parking Area

Barn Area

Comfort

Station

Front Pasture

Existing Amphitheater Site

Side Pastures

Main House

Area

Visito

Farm Managers

Residence

VisitorInformationStation

G

B

C

E

A

A

B

C

E

G

Existing locationNear trailer restroomBuck pastureWooded site near Little River Road(recommended location)

Wooded site near visitor parking area

West side of front pasture (recommended location)Barn meadowWooded site near volunteer parking area(recommended location)

D H

F

D

F

H

Figure B-1. Amphitheater alternative locations
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

122

Factor: Potential damage over time to sensitive or

important historic plants

Criteria:No damage to sensitive or important historic

plants is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: A high attribute means that damage to

sensitive or important historic plants is likely

Minimum standard: Damage can be reduced or repaired

using normal maintenance techniques.

Factor: Anticipated visual impact of vehicles on

visitor experience in main house area

Criteria: Preferred condition is vehicles are not visible

Scale of Assessment: A high attribute means vehicles will

often be visible

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Factor: Anticipated intrusion on historic character of

main house or barn areas

Criteria: Not visible or heard is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means more intrusion is anticipated

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Factor: Capacity to accommodate overflow crowds

without additional site modifications

Criteria:Capacity to accommodate up to 150 additional

persons without the need for added infrastructure is

preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Numeric assessment based on

subjective observation by planning team

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Factor: Potential conflicts between pedestrian and

vehicles

Criteria: Distinct and separate vehicle and pedestrian paths

is preferred condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective - A high attribute means

the probability that pedestrians will share a pathway with a

vehicle is high.

Minimum standard: Unsafe or dangerous conditions are not

present when visitors use normal caution.

Factor: Potential intrusion of external sounds on

amphitheater programs

Criteria: No intrusion of off-site noise is preferred

condition

Scale of Assessment: Subjective assessment - A high

attribute means more intrusion is anticipated

Minimum standard: No minimum standard

Selection of Preferred Locations

Selection of a preferred alternative was accomplished using

Choosing by Advantages (Suhr 1999) - a decision making

process based on calculating and compiling the advantages

of different alternatives for a variety of factors. Advantages

were determined by calculating the difference between

assessments for each factor among the alternatives.

Once advantages were calculated for each factor, a

compiled list was created. A most important advantage was

selected from the compiled list and assigned an importance

value of 100. The remaining advantages were then given

importance values relative to the most important advantage

and totals were calculated for each alternative. The three

alternatives that received the highest compiled scores were

identified as the preferred alternative. Figure B-2

documents the factors, assessments, and importance values

used to determine the preferred alternatives.
A p p e n d i x B  A m p h i t h e a t e r R e l o c a t i o n

123

AMPHITHEATER LOCATION ALTERNATIVES

FACTORS Location A Existing Conditions

(No Action)

Location B Location C Location D

Proximity to 

Visitor Parking 

Area

Proximity to 

nearest 

restroom 

Anticipated amount

of grading required

Anticipated intrusion

 of sound and light 

on park neighbors

Amount of natural 

shade present at site 

Proximity and 

convenience 

to main house 

Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv.

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Location E Location F 

Notes: 

1. A "no advantage" advantage is represented in the importance value column by a blank cell2. The lowest assessment for each factor is highlighted in the assessment row by a heavy underline. In instances 

where more than one alternative scores lowest, only one is highlighted.

3. The alternative with the highest advantage in each factor is highlighted by an oval. In instances where more than 

one alternative has the highest advantage, only one is highlighted.

2140'

strenuous

slope

1750'

strenuous

slope

925'

strenuous

slope

700'

strenuous

slope

1750'

strenuous

slope

150'

mild

slope

5 12 26 30 40 12 

675' closer 1065' closer 1890' closer 2115' closer 2665' closer 1065' closer 

420'

mild

slope

180'

mild

slope

800'

strenuous

slope

450'

moderate

slope

350'

mild

slope

300'

mild

slope

21 35 26 30 25 28 

380' closer

much easier 

slope

42 much less grading

low

30 much less intrusion

limited shade

mostly open 

w/ some trees

20

slighlty

more

shade

50'

mild 

slope

40

2250' closer

much easier

slope

300'

mild 

slope

36

2250' closer

much easier

slope

1700' closer

much easier

slope

300'

strenuous

slope

1400' closer 17

600'

mild

slope

30

1000'

strenuous

slope

2300'

strenuous

slope

1300' closer 23

limited shade

mostly open 

w/ some trees

20

slighlty

more

shade

shady 

woodland

site

shady 

woodland

site

moderate

 shade from

nearby trees

40 55 55

moderately

more

shade

much

more

shade

much

more

shade

low

30 much less intrusion

low

30 much less intrusion

low

30 much less intrusion

low

30 much less intrusion

low low high 

42 much less grading

low

42 much less grading

moderate

20 slightly less grading

moderate

20 slightly less grading

620' closer

much easier 

slope

350' closer

much easier 

slope

450' closer

much easier 

slope

500' closer

much easier 

slope

high

open site w/

few trees 

Import.

Value

Figure B-2. Factors, Assessments, and Importance Values
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

124

AMPHITHEATER LOCATION ALTERNATIVES

FACTORS

Anticipated intrusion

of program activites

on house tour

Anticipated visibilty

of site from front

porch of main house 

Anticipated visibilty

of site from 

barn area 

Anticipated visibilty

of site from bench 

near visitor contact 

station at front lake 

Anticipated 

visibilty

of site from 

Little River Road 

Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv.

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Notes: 

1. A "no advantage" advantage is represented in the importance value column by a blank cell2. The lowest assessment for each factor is highlighted in the assessment row by a heavy underline. In instances 

where more than one alternative scores lowest, only one is highlighted.

3. The alternative with the highest advantage in each factor is highlighted by an oval. In instances where more than 

one alternative has the highest advantage, only one is highlighted.

Location A

Existing Conditions

(No Action)

Location B Location C Location D Location E Location F 

Anticipated intrusion

on visitor experience

of walking up 

entrance trail 

high low low low

high

pla

plainly visible plainly visible

high

high high

66

moderately

 less

intrusion

66

moderately

 less

intrusion

m

66

moderately

 less

intrusion

moderate

50 slightly less intrusion

moderate 

obvious but not

overwhelming

moderate 

obvious but not

disturbing

20

slightly less

visual

intrusion

none

100

much less

visual

 intrusion

none

100

much less

visual

 intrusion

none

80

much less

visual

 intrusion

none

83

much less

visual

 intrusion

none

19 10

moderately

less visual

 intrusion

moderately

less visual

 intrusion

m

le

 

m

none

19 

slightly less

visual

 intrusion

none

83

much less

visual

 intrusion

none

83

much less

visual

 intrusion

m

none

80

much less

visual

 intrusion

none

80

much less

visual

 intrusion

none

80

much less

visual

 intrusion

low, can be 

seen but not 

distracting 

to view

low, can be 

seen but not 

distracting 

to view

low

would be

unnoticed by

most visitors

low

would be

unnoticed by

most visitors

low

would be

unnoticed by

most visitors

low, can be 

seen but not 

distracting 

to view

low, can be 

seen but not 

distracting 

to view

very low

barely in view

low, can be 

seen but not 

distracting 

to view

60 moderately less visual

 intrusion

35

moderately

 less visual

 intrusion

45 20 45 45 moderately less intrusion moderately less intrusion moderately less intrusion slightly less intrusion

low

35

moderately

 less visual

 intrusion

none

100

much less

visual

 intrusion

m

 

moderate

50 slightly less intrusion

Import.

Value

Figure B-2. Factors, Assessments, and Importance Values (cont.)
A p p e n d i x B  A m p h i t h e a t e r R e l o c a t i o n

125

AMPHITHEATER LOCATION ALTERNATIVES

FACTORS

Ability of service

and emergency

vehicles to 

access site

Vulnerability to

unauthorized use

and vandalism,

distance from nearest

park entry point 

used as comparison 

measurement

Need to remove

existing vegetation,

especially trees

and shrubs 

Potential damage

to sensitive or

important historic

plants 

Anticipated 

visual impact of 

vehicles on visitor

experience in 

main house area

Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv.

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Notes: 

1. A "no advantage" advantage is represented in the importance value column by a blank cell2. The lowest assessment for each factor is highlighted in the assessment row by a heavy underline. In instances 

where more than one alternative scores lowest, only one is highlighted.

3. The alternative with the highest advantage in each factor is highlighted by an oval. In instances where more than 

one alternative has the highest advantage, only one is highlighted.

Location A

Existing Conditions

(No Action)

Location B Location C Location D Location E Location F 

Anticipated intrusion

on historic character

of main house or 

barn areas

paved road, 

convenient 

access

paved road, 

convenient 

access

paved road, 

convenient 

access

paved road, 

convenient 

access

p

c

paved road, 

accessible with

some 

maneuvering

nearest paved

 area 

100' away

15 minutes

from nearest 

point of entry

10 minutes

from nearest 

point of entry

14.5 

minutes

farther 

9.5 

minutes

farther 

7

moderately

easier 

access

moderately

easier 

access

moderately

easier 

access

m

moderately

easier 

access

3

slightly

easier 

access

7 7 

very low, 

no trees or

pasture 

removed

much less 

removal 

necessary

48

high

historic plants 

near house

high, 

occasional 

vehicles in

plain sight

high, located

in close 

proximity

hi

in 

high, 

occasional 

vehicles in

plain sight

high, soil 

erosion and 

compaction

potential

low,

no sensitve 

plants 

endangered

moderately

less potential

for damage

52

moderate,

partially

screened from 

main house

slightly

less potential

for damage

30

moderate,

partially

screened from 

main house

slightly

less potential

for damage

30

moderate,

partially

screened from 

main house

slightly

less potential

for damage

30

low,

heavily

screened from 

main house 

moderately

less potential

for damage

90

low,

no sensitve 

plants 

endangered

moderately

less potential

for damage

52

much less

visual

 intrusion

40

much less

visual

 intrusion

40

low,

vehicles 

rarely visible

low,

vehicles 

rarely visible

low,

vehicles 

rarely visible

much less

visual

 intrusion

40

m

moderate,

vehicles seen

occasionaly

slightly

 less visual

 intrusion

30

low,

no sensitve 

plants 

endangered

moderately

less potential

for damage

52

n

e

m

les

fo

slightly

less potential

for damage

40

moderate, soil 

compaction a 

potential

impact

very low, 

no trees and

little pasture 

removed

much less 

removal 

necessary

48

moderate,

a few 

mature trees 

removed

slightly less 

removal 

necessary

30

high, several 

mature trees 

removed

 low, one 

tree and no

pasture 

removed

moderately 

less removal 

necessary

moderately 

less removal 

necessary

m

le

39

 low, no 

tree and some

pasture 

removed

tree 

39 

8 5

10 minutes

from nearest 

point of entry

9.5 

minutes

farther 5

5 minutes

from nearest 

point of entry

2 minutes

from nearest 

point of entry

4.5 

minutes

farther 2

fr

p

1.5 

minutes

farther 1

30 seconds

from nearest 

point of entry

7

Import.

Value

Figure B-2. Factors, Assessments, and Importance Values (cont.)
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site  G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n

126

AMPHITHEATER LOCATION ALTERNATIVES

FACTORS

Capacity to 

accommodate

overflow crowds 

without additional 

site modifications

Low

Less than 50

more persons

Low

infrequent

interaction

Low Moderate Moderate Moderate 

High road noise High road noise

Low

infrequent

interaction

Low

infrequent

interaction

Moderate

occasional

interaction

Moderate

occasional

interaction

High

frequent

interaction

i

25 25 13

45 15 15 45 45

466 663 520 784 556 761 

25 

Low

Less than 50

more persons

High

Over 150

more persons

High

Over 150

more persons

High

Over 150

more persons

O

mo

Moderate

About 75

more persons

Potential for 

conflicts 

between 

pedestrians

and vehicles

Potential intrusion 

of external sounds 

on amphitheater 

programs 

Total Importance Value

for all factors 

Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv. Assess. Adv.

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Import.

Value

Notes: 

1. A "no advantage" advantage is represented in the importance value column by a blank cell2. The lowest assessment for each factor is highlighted in the assessment row by a heavy underline. In instances 

where more than one alternative scores lowest, only one is highlighted.

3. The alternative with the highest advantage in each factor is highlighted by an oval. In instances where more than 

one alternative has the highest advantage, only one is highlighted.

Location A

Existing Conditions

(No Action)

Location B Location C Location D Location E Location F 

Location B Location C Location D Location E Location F 

150+ 

additoinal

persons

much

less

interaction

much

less

intrusion

slightly

less

interaction

slightly

less

intrusion

slightly

less

intrusion

slightly

less

intrusion

slightly

less

interaction

much

less

interaction

much

less

interaction

150+ 

additoinal

persons

150+ 

additoinal

persons

75 

additoinal

persons

Location A

Existing Conditions

(No Action)

Import.

Value

Figure B-2. Factors, Assessments, and Importance Values (cont.)
A p p e n d i x B  A m p h i t h e a t e r R e l o c a t i o n

127

General Management Plan  Glossary

129

Access: how visitors get to the park and to the features therein,

including roads and trails.

Acquisition: the act or process of acquiring through purchase

or donation fee title to or other interest in real property

(including development rights or remainder interest). Also

applies to museum property.

Adaptive use: a use for a structure or landscape other than its

historic use, normally entailing some modification of the

structure or landscape.

Administrative facility: a facility that contains office and/or

storage space for park staff.

Alternative: a possible course of action, one of several

different ways to achieve an objective or vision.

Archival collection: an accumulation of manuscripts, archival

documents, or papers having a shared origin or provenance,

or having been assembled around a common topic, format or

record, or association. The term also refers to the total archival

and manuscript holdings of the park.

Archives: the noncurrent records of an organization or

institution preserved for their historic value. The term archives

is often used to refer to the repository where archives and

other historic documents are maintained.

Association: the relationship between a historic event, activity,

or person and a cultural resource.

Best Management Practices: practices that apply the most

current means and technologies available to not only comply

with mandatory environmental regulations, but also maintain

a superior level of environmental performance.

Carrying Capacity: the type and level of visitor use that can

be accommodated while sustaining the desired resource and

visitor experience conditions in a park.

Circulation: how visitors move through the facilities and

grounds of the park.

Consultation: a discussion, conference, or forum in which

advice or information is sought or given, or information or

ideas are exchanged.

Cultural landscape: a geographic area, including both

cultural and natural resources and the wildlife or domestic

animals therein, associated with a historic event, activity, or

person or exhibiting other cultural aesthetic values.

GLOSSARY

Cultural resource: an aspect of a cultural system that is

valued by or significantly representative of a culture or that

contains significant information about a culture. A cultural

resource may be a tangible entity or cultural practice. Tangible

cultural resources are categorized as districts, sites, buildings,

structures, and objects for the National Register of Historic

Places and as archeological resources, cultural landscapes,

structures, museum objects, and ethnographic resources for

NPS management purposes.

Design: the combination of elements that create the form,

plan, space, structure, and style.

Ecosystem: interrelated living entities, including humans, and

their physical environment.

Environmental assessment (EA): a brief NEPA document

that is prepared (a) to help determine whether the impact of a

proposed action or its alternatives could be significant; (b) to

aid the NPS in compliance with NEPA by evaluation a

proposal that will have no significant impacts, but may have

measurable adverse impacts; or (c) as an evaluation of a

proposal that is either not described on the list of categorically

excluded actions, or is on the list, but exceptional

circumstances apply.

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): a detailed NEPA

analysis document that is prepared when a proposed action or

alternatives have the potential for significant impact on the

human environment.

Feeling: a properties expression of the aesthetic or historic

sense of a particular period of time.

General Management Plan (GMP): a plan which clearly

defines direction for resource preservation and visitor use in a

park and serves as the basic foundation for decision making.

GMP’s are developed with broad public involvement.

Historic character: the sum of all visual aspects, features,

materials, and spaces associated with a property’s history.

Historic landscape: a cultural landscape associated with

events, persons, design styles or ways of life that are significant

in American history, landscape architecture, archeology,

engineering, and culture; also a landscape listed in or eligible

for the National Register of Historic Places.
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

130

Historic scene: the overall appearance of all cultural

resources and their interrelationships that provide the context

for understanding and interpreting the events, ideas, or

persons associated with a park.

Historic site: the site of a significant, prehistoric occupation

or activity, or structure or landscape whether extant or

vanished, where the site itself possesses historical, cultural, or

archeological value apart from the value of any existing

structure or landscape.

Historical significance: the meaning or value ascribed to a

structure, landscape, object, or site based on the National

Register criteria for evaluation. It normally stems from a

combination of association and integrity.

Impact: the likely effects of an action or proposed action

upon specific natural, cultural, or socioeconomic resources.

Impacts may be direct, indirect, cumulative, beneficial, or

adverse.

Impairment: An impact so severe that, in the professional

judgement of a responsible NPS manager, it would harm the

integrity of park resources or values and violate the 1916 NPS

Organic Act.

Implementation plan: a plan that focuses on how to

implement an activity or project needed to achieve a long-term

goal. An implementation plan may direct a specific project or

an ongoing activity.

Integrity: the authenticity of a property’s historic identity,

evidenced by the survival or physical characteristics that

existed during its historic or prehistoric period; the extent to

which a property retains its historic appearance.

Manuscript collection: a group of textual, electronic, sound,

or visual documents assembled most commonly for its

historical or literary value.

Museum collection: assemblage of objects, works or art,

historic documents, and/or natural history specimens

collected according to a rational scheme and maintained so

they can be preserved, studied, and interpreted for public

benefit. Museum collections normally are kept in park

museums, although thy may also be maintained in

archeological and historic preservation centers.

Museum object: a material thing possessing functional,

aesthetic, cultural, symbolic, and/or scientific value, usually

moveable by nature or design. Museum objects include

prehistoric and historic objects, artifacts, works of art, archival

material, and natural history specimens that are part of a

museum collection.

National Historic Landmark: a district, site, building,

structure, or object of national significance, designated by the

Secretary of the Interior under the authority of the Historic

Sites Act of 1935 and entered in the National Register of

Historic Places.

National Register of Historic Places: the comprehensive list

of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of national,

regional, state, and local significance in American history,

architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture kept by the

NPS under authority of the National Historic Preservation Act

of 1966.

NEPA process: the objective analysis of a proposed action to

determine the degree of its environmental impact on the

natural and physical environment; alternatives and mitigation

that reduce the impact; and the full and candid presentation of

the analysis to, and involvement of, the interested public.

Required of federal agencies by the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969.

Park: Any one of the hundreds of areas of land and water

administered as part of the national park system. The term is

used interchangeably in this document with “unit,” “park

unit,” “park area,” and “National Historic Site.”

Park operations: the activities, programs, and staffing

necessary to manage and operate the park.

Period of Significance: the span of time in which a property

attained the significance for which it meets the National

Register criteria.

Planning Partner: similar to stakeholder, a planning partner

is an individual, group, or other entity that has a strong interest

in decisions concerning park resources and values and is

actively participating in this GMP process.

Prescriptive Management Zone (PMZ): a planning term

referring to statements about desired resource conditions and

visitor experiences, along with appropriate kinds and levels of

management, use, and development for a specific park area.

Preservation: the act or process of applying measures to

sustain the existing form, integrity, and material of a historic

structure, landscape, or object. Work may include preliminary

measures to protect and stabilize the property, but generally

focus upon the ongoing preservation maintenance and repair

of historic materials and feature other than extensive

replacement and new work.
General Management Plan  G l o s s a r y

131

Protection: action to safeguard a historic property by

defending or guarding it from further deterioration, loss, or

attack or shielding if from danger or injury. In the case of

structures and landscapes such action is generally of a

temporary nature and anticipates future preservation

treatment. Protection in its broadest sense also includes longterm efforts to deter or prevent vandalism, theft, arson, and

other criminal acts against cultural resources.

Rehabilitation: the act or process of making possible an

efficient compatible use for a historic structure or landscape

through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving

those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural,

and architectural values.

Reproduction (of objects): the construction or fabrication of

an accurate copy of an object.

Significance: the meaning or value ascribed to an historic

property or cultural landscape based upon the National

Register criteria for evaluation.

Stakeholder: an individual, group, or other entity that has a

strong interest in decisions concerning park resources and

values. In the broadest sense, all Americans are stakeholders in

the national parks.

State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO): an official

within each state appointed by the governor to administer the

state historic preservation program and carry out certain

responsibilities relating to federal undertakings within the

state.

Superintendent: the senior on-site NPS official in a park.

Treatment: work carried out to achieve a particular historic

preservation goal.

Viewshed: the area that can be seen from a particular

location, including near and distant views.

G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P la n  References

133

REFERENCES

De Chiara, Joseph.

1991 Time Saver Standards for Interior Design and Space Planning. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company. New York, NY.

2001 Time Saver Standards for Building Types, Fourth Edition. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company. New York, NY.

Haas, Glenn E.

2001 Visitor Capacity in the National Park System. Social Science Research Review, Volume 2, Number 1, Spring 2001.

National Park Service Social Science Program, National Park Service, Washington, D.C.

Harris, Charles W.

1998 Time Saver Standards for Landscape Architecture: Design and Construction Data, Second Edition. McGraw-Hill

Publishing Company. New York, NY.

Hart, Susan

1993 Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site Cultural Landscape Report. Cultural Resources Planning Division,

Southeast Regional Office, National Park Service. Atlanta, GA.

Henderson County GIS

1996 U.S. Flood Hazard Areas: FEMA Digital Q3 Flood Data. WWW:

(http://mapserver2.esri.com/cgi-bin/hazard.adol?z=o&c=-

82.453471%2C35.266150&p=2&d=1&s=0&cd=p&Map.x=138&Map.y=148)

Hendersonville Chamber of Commerce

2000 Economic Development Information. WWW: (http://www.hendersonvillechamber.org/edc/index.shtml)

National Park Service (NPS)

1971 Master Plan: Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site, North Carolina. National Park Service. Washington, D.C.

1977 Environmental Assessment / Development Concept Plan: Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site, North

Carolina. Denver Service Center, National Park Service. Denver, CO.

1979 Development Concept Plan, Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site. Denver Service Center, National Park

Service. Denver, CO.

1992 Collection Management Plan, Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site. Carl Sandburg Home National Historic

Site, National Park Service. Flat Rock, NC.

1993 Statement For Interpretation, Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site. Carl Sandburg Home National Historic

Site, National Park Service. Flat Rock, NC.

1997 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties: with guidelines for the treatment

of historic landscapes. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Resource Stewardship and

Partnerships Heritage Preservation Services Historic Landscape Initiative. Washington, D.C.

2000 Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site Transportation Study. Division of Planning and Compliance, Southeast

Regional Office, National Park Service. Atlanta, GA.
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

134

2001a Management Policies 2001. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. Washington, D.C.

2001b Cost Estimating Guideline with Class C Cost Data: New Construction. Estimating Branch – Contracting Services

Division, Denver Service Center, National Park Service. Denver, CO.

Pence, Heather R.

1998 Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site Archeological Overview and Assessment. Southeast Archeological

Center, National Park Service. Tallahassee, FL.

Suhr, Jim

1999 The Choosing By Advantages Decision Making System. Greenwood Publishing Group. Westport, CN.

U.S. Census Bureau

1999 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates – 1997. WWW: (http://www.census.gov/

hhes/www/saipe/estimatetoc.html)

2000a U.S. Bureau of the Census, Quick Facts for Henderson County, NC. WWW: (http://www.quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/

states/37000/)

2000b U.S. Bureau of the Census , Overview of Henderson County, NC. WWW: (http://www.fedstats.gov/qf/states/37/

37089.html)

2000c U.S. Bureau of the Census, Model Based Poverty Estimates for 1997. WWW: (http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/

saipe/estimate/cty/cty37089.htm)

N.C. Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

1998 Agricultural Statistics Division – County Statistics. WWW: (http://www.ncagr.com/stats/cntysumm/hendrson.htm)

U.S. Department of Commerce

2002 Bureau of Economic Analysis: Regional Accounts Data. WWW: (http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/data.htm)

Van Beck, Sara L.

2000 Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site Archives Assessment. Cultural Services Program, Cultural Resources

Stewardship, Southeast Regional Office, National Park Service. Atlanta, GA.

Weeks, Kay D.

1995 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties: with guidelines for preserving,

rehabilitating, restoring and reconstructing historic buildings. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,

Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships Heritage Preservation Services. Washington, D.C.

White, Rickie D.

2002 Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site Vascular Plant Inventory and Vegetation Classification: Report for the

Vertebrate and Vascular Plant Inventories for the Appalachian Highlands and Cumberland/Piedmont Network.

Southeast Regional Office, National Park Service. Atlanta, GA.
General Management Plan  References

135

General Management Plan  I n d e x

137

INDEX

A

amphitheater 3, 4, 6, 7, 15, 19, 25, 27, 28, 34, 39,

43-47, 49, 53, 56, 58, 60, 62, 69, 85, 86,

91-94, 97, 101, 103, 107, 109, 111

Amphitheater Relocation Zone 4, 31, 34, 46, 53

B

back gate 5, 41, 49, 56, 97, 101, 103

Big Glassy 37, 56, 58, 69, 73, 85, 91, 96, 98,

99, 103, 106

boundary expansion 4, 5, 36, 38, 44, 46, 47,

52-58, 96, 103, 104

C

Choosing by Advantages 21, 62, 79, 80

comfort station 4, 26, 32, 35, 39, 44, 46, 52, 53,

56, 69, 85, 90, 98, 105

common actions 4

Connemara 5, 15, 38, 42, 55

Connemara Lifestyle alternative 4, 5, 38, 41, 55, 58,

84, 91, 92, 99, 105, 106, 107, 111

cost estimate 47, 58, 60

cultural landscape 22, 37, 44, 90

Cultural Landscape Report 27, 32, 44, 56, 91, 98, 105

cultural resources 6, 7, 19, 21, 22, 23, 37, 41, 68,

80, 84, 90, 97, 105

D

DCP - see development concept plan

development concept plan 3, 18, 37, 47, 53, 54,

56, 58, 60, 90, 91, 98, 105

E

energy conservation 75, 84, 88, 95, 103, 109

Environmentally Preferred alternative 4, 31, 42,

62, 79, 80

existing conditions 8, 43, 44, 49, 55, 60, 68, 74,

76, 87, 88, 99

F

Flat Rock Playhouse 19, 21, 25, 60, 75, 89, 95, 102

Front Lake 4, 38, 40, 46, 49, 56, 58, 69, 73,

85, 93, 94, 96, 100, 101, 104, 108

H

Henderson County 39, 67, 76, 96, 104, 110, 115

Hendersonville 3, 75, 115

Historic Discovery Zone 4, 31, 32, 43, 46, 49, 52,

53, 55, 56, 58, 90, 91, 97, 98, 105

historic integrity 4, 5, 19, 23, 24, 25, 37, 80

Historic Interaction Zone 4, 31, 42-44, 46,

49, 52, 53, 55, 56, 58, 90-93, 98, 101, 105, 108
Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site

138

historic structures 4, 18, 25, 26, 32, 36, 39, 42,

43, 44, 46, 50, 53, 55, 56, 60, 68, 85, 90, 91,

97, 99, 105

L

Little River Road 5, 7, 25, 35, 37, 38, 41, 44, 52,

53, 69, 73-75, 85, 88, 91, 96, 97-99, 101-105,

109, 111

local businesses 7, 8, 25, 26, 89, 96, 104, 110

M

Major Decision Points 28, 62

mission statement 3, 20

museum operations 6, 7, 69, 80, 81, 86, 92,

99, 106

museum preservation center 6, 19, 35, 37, 42, 60, 68,

69, 86, 98

N

National Environmental Policy Act 6, 32, 39, 80, 81

NEPA 32, 39, 40, 42-46, 49, 50, 52, 53, 56, 62,

74, 80, 85, 88, 90, 94, 102, 109

No Action alternative 3, 4, 6, 39, 79, 84-91, 100, 110

P

park headquarters 75, 88

Park Services Zone 4, 31, 35, 43, 46, 49, 53, 55, 56,

58, 90, 94, 97, 98, 101, 105, 108

parking 3-7, 15, 19, 21, 25, 35, 39, 40,

41, 43, 49, 50-53, 55, 56, 58, 60, 69, 74, 75,

84, 85, 88, 91, 93, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100-1055,

108, 109, 110, 111

partnership 5, 18, 19, 26, 28, 42, 43, 49,

50, 53, 55, 93, 100, 103

pasture 36, 37, 41, 68, 69, 73, 74, 85,

93, 97, 99, 101, 106, 108

Paths of Discovery alternative 4-7, 31, 37, 38, 41,

49, 52, 53, 55, 84, 97, 99, 100-105, 110

phased implementation 38, 46, 53, 58

planning issues 20, 24, 28, 67

planning team 31, 36, 37, 39, 62, 73, 76, 114

PMZ 3, 31, 32, 34, 35, 39, 46, 53, 58

preferred alternative 3, 4, 21, 31, 42, 62, 79, 80

Prescriptive Management Zones 3, 31, 42, 46, 49,

53, 55, 58, 60

Purpose Statement 3, 20

Q

quality of life 3, 5, 7, 49, 76, 80, 84, 89, 95, 103, 110

R

recreation 3, 19, 22, 23-25, 28, 52, 60, 76, 86, 87

recreational carrying capacity 31

Resource Management Plan 28, 32

S

safety 21, 32, 34-38, 43, 55, 56, 68, 73-75, 81, 84,

88, 95, 102, 109

Sandburg Center alternative 3-7, 31, 42, 46, 62, 90-99, 110
General Management Plan  I n d e x

139

scenic view 37, 56, 94

Scoping 36

scoping 20, 24, 25, 27, 28, 38, 39, 62, 68, 69, 81

service-wide laws and policies 21, 22, 23, 24

Significance Statement 3, 20

solitude 4, 32, 44, 46, 52, 69, 81, 85, 86, 91, 98,

99, 106

staffing 23, 43, 50, 55, 74, 87, 88, 109

T

technical advisors 114

traffic congestion 7, 41, 75, 88, 95, 102, 103, 109, 110

trailer restroom 6, 47, 53, 58, 60

V

Village of Flat Rock 5, 15, 26, 39, 44, 52, 67, 75,

91, 95, 102

visitor center 4, 5, 7, 37, 38, 41-44, 47,

49, 51-55, 84, 91-104

visitor contact area 4, 39, 43, 50, 52, 53, 55, 90, 97

visitor information station 4-8, 15, 38, 40, 43,

44, 49, 50, 52, 55, 56, 69, 74, 75, 85, 92, 99,

108, 110, 111

visitor parking area 6, 38, 46, 49, 53, 58, 74, 75,

88, 91, 93, 95, 97, 100, 102, 103, 108, 109

Visitor Services Zone 31, 34, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 46, 49,

50-55, 56, 58, 90-105, 108-111

volunteer parking area 41, 75, 88, 93, 95, 100,

102, 109

W

walking 3, 7, 19, 24, 25, 32, 49, 52, 76, 77,

84, 85, 89, 91, 95, 96, 98, 99, 100, 103, 110

walking trail 4, 5, 19, 32, 34, 35, 39, 43, 46, 49,

55, 69, 77, 95, 96, 97, 98, 103, 105, 110

waysides 4, 7, 32, 34, 41, 43, 46, 49,

52, 55, 56, 69, 85, 90, 97, 98, 100, 101