Historic District Commission — Fayetteville, AR
Date: 2026-03-12
Time: 17:30

113 W. Mountain St
 Fayetteville, AR 72701

 Historic District Commission Agenda
 City Hall Meeting Room 101/ Virtual Meeting Via Zoom
 Thursday, March 12, 2026
 5:30 PM


 Members
 Chair Christine Myres (Exp: 06/28)
 Vice Chair Cheri Coley (Exp: 06/27)
 Meredith Mahan (Exp: 06/26)
 Jennifer Didway (Exp: 06/27)
 Tommie Flowers Davis (Exp: 06/27)
 Mark Harper (Exp: 06/27)
 Karen Rorex (Exp: 06/28)

 City Staff
 Long Range and Historic Preservation Planner Kylee Cole
Long Range Planning and Special Projects Manager Britin Bostick
Historic District Commission March 12, 2026




Zoom Information

 Webinar ID: 840 2719 5015
 Registration Link: https://fayetteville-
 ar.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_f7HGmAuqT-ipZ__Xsp5EzQ

Call to Order

Roll Call

Minutes
 Approval of the February 12, 2026 Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes.


Unfinished Business

 Oak Grove Design Guidelines

 Review draft guidelines for Oak Grove Local Historic District for adoption.


 Downtown Design Overlay District Review

 Citywide Survey Ph. 1 Update

New Business

 Proposed Southeast Fayetteville Local Historic District

 Review proposal for the creation of a local historic district southeast of Downtown
 with emphasis on the historic Black community.


 Oak Grove Local Historic District Amendment

 Review proposed amendment to add the property at 515 N. Park Avenue to the
 Oak Grove Historic District.


 May Historic Preservation Month Planning


City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 2
Historic District Commission March 12, 2026




Announcements

Adjournment




City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 3

113 W. Mountain St
 Fayetteville, AR 72701

 Historic District Commission Agenda
 City Hall Meeting Room 101/ Virtual Meeting Via Zoom
 Thursday, March 12, 2026
 5:30 PM


 Members
 Chair Christine Myres (Exp: 06/28)
 Vice Chair Cheri Coley (Exp: 06/27)
 Meredith Mahan (Exp: 06/26)
 Jennifer Didway (Exp: 06/27)
 Tommie Flowers Davis (Exp: 06/27)
 Mark Harper (Exp: 06/27)
 Karen Rorex (Exp: 06/28)

 City Staff
 Long Range and Historic Preservation Planner Kylee Cole
Long Range Planning and Special Projects Manager Britin Bostick
Historic District Commission March 12, 2026




Zoom Information

 Webinar ID: 840 2719 5015
 Registration Link: https://fayetteville-
 ar.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_f7HGmAuqT-ipZ__Xsp5EzQ

Call to Order

Roll Call

Minutes
 Approval of the February 12, 2026 Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes.


Unfinished Business

 Oak Grove Design Guidelines

 Review draft guidelines for Oak Grove Local Historic District for adoption.


 Downtown Design Overlay District Review

 Citywide Survey Ph. 1 Update

New Business

 Proposed Southeast Fayetteville Local Historic District

 Review proposal for the creation of a local historic district southeast of Downtown
 with emphasis on the historic Black community.


 Oak Grove Local Historic District Amendment

 Review proposed amendment to add the property at 515 N. Park Avenue to the
 Oak Grove Historic District.


 May Historic Preservation Month Planning


City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 2
Historic District Commission March 12, 2026




Announcements

Adjournment




City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 3
  Oak Grove
  Historic District
Advisory Design Guidelines
Acknowledgements
 Lorem Ipsum Dolor
 Table of Contents
Preface
  Introduction to Oak Grove .......................................................... 3
  Purpose ....................................................................................... 7
  General Application of Guidelines ............................................. 8

Advisory Guidelines
  Accessibility - Ramps, Lifts, Paving and Elevators ..................10
  Additions......................................................................................11
  Architectural Features.................................................................14
  Chimneys......................................................................................15
  Decks............................................................................................16
  Doors and Entrances...................................................................16
  Foundations.................................................................................17
  Gutters and Downspouts.............................................................18
  Lighting........................................................................................19
  Masonry....................................................................................... 20
  Materials...................................................................................... 21
  Mechanical Systems and Energy Retrofits (Solar)................... 22
  Paint and Colors......................................................................... 23
  Porches....................................................................................... 24
  Roofs........................................................................................... 26
  Signs and House Numbers........................................................ 26
  Windows..................................................................................... 27
  Wood Siding............................................................................... 31
Advisory Guidelines - Setting
  Driveways.................................................................................... 32
  Fences and Gates....................................................................... 33
  Retaining Walls........................................................................... 34
  Garages and Outbuildings.......................................................... 35
  Walkways..................................................................................... 35
  Landscaping................................................................................ 36
Appendices
  Terminology ................................................................................ 40
  Planning Your Project ................................................................ 41
 Introduction to Oak Grove
The Oak Grove Historic District preserves a residential neighborhood located near
Fayetteville’s Wilson Park and within walking distance of the Fayetteville Square, Dickson
Street, and the University of Arkansas campus.

Originally platted as Oak Grove Addition
—a name referring to the many post oak
trees in the area, many of which still stand
today—the neighborhood is characterized
by its wooded natural setting and rustic
topography, its distinct vernacular
architecture, and its significance in
Fayetteville’s history.


The neighborhood was largely
developed by Dr. Noah F. Drake, a
University of Arkansas geologist who
helped establish City Park, later known Figure 1. 1908 Plat Map of Oak Grove Addition.
as Wilson Park—the first public park in Portion in proposed district outlined in red.
Fayetteville and a much-beloved outdoor space for the city’s residents today. Born on a farm
in Washington County in 1864, then educated at Cane Hill College and Arkansas Industrial
University (now the University of Arkansas) in civil engineering (class of 1888). Drake
eventually completed his PhD in geology at Stanford University in California in 1897 and
 spent many years thereafter as a professor of geology in
 Tianjin, China, where he was involved in petroleum mining.
 In 1911, Drake moved back to the United States, first
 teaching at Stanford before returning to Arkansas in 1912.
 Upon his return to Fayetteville, Drake resided in a home
 within the present boundary of the Oak Grove Historic
 District at 513 North Highland Avenue, then bought many
 nearby lots in the Oak Grove Addition and the neighboring
 Englewood Addition that he would soon develop.




 Figure 2. Noah Fields Drake. Source: Orange County
 California Genealogical Society (Vera Wade Drake).


Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 3
 Introduction to Oak Grove
These include the corner lot on Maple Street
and Forest Avenue, where he built his own
family home: a house that recalls the iconic
California Craftsman Bungalow through its
large front porch, overhanging roof, and
exposed rafter tails, but also includes unusual
features, like its terracotta tile roof, which
perhaps recalls the tiled roofs on Stanford’s
campus or the local architecture of Tianjin, a
reference recorded in Drake’s family
correspondence. Figure 3. Drake’s Family Home

 Drake also built the many “Rock Houses” in the
 neighborhood, including a distinct series of homes on
 West Davidson Street and North Park Avenue. These
 houses are defined by their use of local sandstone on
 their exterior facades. Drake created his own rock
 house style distinct from the “Ozark giraffe,” named for
 its resemblance to the distinctive patterning of giraffe
 hides, evoking his background as a geologist and
 representing an innovative use of local materials in
 this region.
 Figure 4. 16 Davidson

Other residential properties in the Historic District
incorporate wood shingles, stucco, and natural
materials, creating a charming connection between
nature and architecture; houses are set in landscaped
plots defined by rock work, large trees, and gardens.
As explained in a study of the notable historic
structures throughout Arkansas, these homes are
“subtle in their distinctions, romantic in their image.
Their hilly, leafy siting contributes to their desirability.
... Floral gardens complement the grounds of many of
the houses, visually connecting them with the Figure 5. 603 Park
extensively planted beds of neighboring Wilson Park.”[1]


 [1] Cyrus A. Sutherland, with Gregory Herman, Claudia Shannon, Jean Sizemore, and Jeannie M. Whayne,
 Buildings of Arkansas (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2018), 54.
 Introduction to Oak Grove
The neighborhood was home to significant figures in the city’s and University of
Arkansas’s early history. Drake, for example, purchased City Park in 1926 and developed
it with a pool and stone tourist cottages, three of which still stand, before selling it to the
City of Fayetteville in 1944. He experimented with cultivating native walnut trees at his
orchard and farm in North Fayetteville; some of these trees still dot the streets of Oak
Grove. Drake also provided money for purchasing the first portion of land at Drake Field,
the municipal airport located in South Fayetteville; the White Hanger at Drake Field is now
preserved as a Local Historic District.

 Other figures who lived in the boundaries
 of the Historic District are also significant
 in local history. Superintendent Wayne
 White (515 Forest Avenue) integrated the
 Fayetteville School District in 1954—
 Fayetteville was one of the very first
 districts in the former Confederacy to
 desegregate, and did so peacefully. Dr.
 Harry R. Rosen (509 Forest Avenue)
 advanced the science of crop production
 and is the namesake for the University’s
 Rosen Center for Alternative Pest Control,
 located up the road on Maple Street. His
 terraced backyard was once used for
 cultivating new varieties of garden roses
 which he bred and released, including
 Figure 6. 515 Forest Miriam’s Climber, named for his daughter.

 George Clifton Wade (501 Forest Avenue) served as a member of the Arkansas Senate
(1955-1971) and a member of the Arkansas House of Representatives (1947-1955).


 The intent of the Oak Grove Historic District is to
 preserve this unique neighborhood—a cohesive and
 intact example of Ozark vernacular residential
 architecture and neighborhood design—for the future.


Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 5
 Introduction to Oak Grove
 The Oak Grove Historic District was created by Fayetteville City Council on
 XXXXX, 2026 (Ord. No. XXX).




 Figure 7. Proposed Oak Grove Local Historic District


Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 6
 Purpose
 The design guidelines for the Oak Grove Historic District provide the HDC and property
 owners with best practices for residential rehabilitation[2] and new construction. The
 guidelines are practical approaches to specific design elements common for dwellings
 built in the early 20th century.

 Rehabilitation assumes that at least some repair or alteration of the historic building will
 be needed to provide for efficient contemporary use; however, these repairs and
 alterations must not damage or destroy materials, features, or finishes that are important
 in defining the building's historic character. Design guidelines aim to provide acceptable
 solutions to adapting historic buildings for modern lifestyles, striking a balance between
 function and preservation. The guidelines allow for change when it is accomplished in a
 sensitive manner that maintains the special character of the Historic District while meeting
 the practical needs of the residents and property owners. The guidelines direct the HDC,
 staff, and property owners in making appropriate decisions in the physical appearance of
 exterior elements of historic properties regarding primary residential buildings, as well as
 their associated outbuildings, site features, landscaping, driveways, walkways, and
 overall streetscapes.

 Of particular importance to the HDC and Historic District residents is preventing
 demolition of significant resources. Demolition of properties which contribute to the
 character of the district should only be a last resort and the burden of proof to justify
 demolition will be the responsibility of the property owner.




 Figure 8. Oak Grove Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro

[2] "Rehabilitation" is defined as "the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair
or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and
 features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural and cultural values.”
 General Application of Guidelines
The following guidelines only apply to exteriors; interior changes are not reviewed by the
Historic District Commission.

CORE TENENTS
 1. Always repair existing original elements when possible.
 2. When replacing original elements damaged beyond repair, match as closely as
 possible.
 3. When replacing a missing element, research comparable historical examples to inform
 selection of a replacement.
 4. When altering a historical element, take care to make changes that are reversable.
 This will allow future owners to restore historical elements to their original
 appearance.
 5. Keep historical elements visible. Be gentle when cleaning. Take steps to keep them
 dry.

SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARD FOR REHABILITATION
The following standards, prepared by the federal government, serve as general principles
for historic preservation of buildings in the United States and complement the core tenets
articulated above.

  1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that
 requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and
 environment.
  2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. Avoid the
 removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a
 property.
  3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.
 Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding
 conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be
 undertaken.
  4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic
 significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.
  5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of
 craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 8
 General Application of Guidelines
  6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the
 severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature
 shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where
 possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by
 documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.
  7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic
 materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be
 undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
  8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and
 preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be
 undertaken.
  9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy
 historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated
 from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural
 features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.
 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a
 manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic
 property and its environment would be unimpaired.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 9
 Advisory Guidelines
The following guidance aims to help homeowners maintain and preserve the original
features on the exterior of Historic District homes. Advisory guidelines do not require
review by the Historic District Commission.

6. Accessibility - Ramps, Lifts, Paving and Elevators
The addition of new ramps, wheelchair lifts, paved paths, and elevators to historic dwellings may
be required to provide access and meet the needs of residents and visitors. Property owners
should contact the City of Fayetteville staff at the start of planning. Staff will provide professional
planning assistance and will work with building code officials to investigate alternative methods
for meeting accessibility requirements on historical dwellings.
If the need for access is only occasional, consider temporary ramps rather than permanent ones.
Accessibility modifications should avoid loss of original fabric and should be reversible whenever
possible.



Guidelines
6.1 Install accessibility features with minimal effect to dwelling.
To provide accessibility to residences, modifications may be needed to facilitate safe access for
those with limited mobility. Make any alterations in such a manner that a historic property’s
character-defining features are affected as minimally as possible. To diminish the impact of
accessibility features, design these elements to be compatible with the architectural character,
proportion, scale, materials, and finish of the historic dwelling. Elevators can sometimes be
sensitively installed inside a house without affecting rooms, features, or details.

6.2 Install ramps on side or rear elevations to minimize their visual impact.

6.3 Use temporary ramps where possible.
If the need for accessibility is intermittent, consider the use of temporary ramps which can be
stored and not visible when not in use.

6.4 New walkways paved in stone, brick, concrete, and permeable materials are appropriate in
the Historic District. The use of asphalt for walkways is not appropriate and the use of this
material is discouraged.

6.5 Avoid loss of original fabric of a dwelling and design reversable modifications when possible.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 10
 Advisory Guidelines
7. Additions
Additions to dwellings are appropriate if they minimally affect historic materials, are not readily
visible, are secondary in size and scale to the footprint of the original dwelling and maintain the
dominance of the original structure. The new addition should be distinguishable from the
character of the original dwelling while blending with the overall design. Additions that alter the
original roof form may require review by the Historic District Commission, but additions that do
not impact the original roof form or are not visible from the public right-of-way will not.


Guidelines
7.1 Consider the location, size, and scale of the addition.
A new addition should be secondary to the historic dwelling. Locate new additions on rear or side
elevations not visible from the street.

7.2 Retain historic character.
The addition should blend with the historic dwelling but appear as a discernible wing from the
historical building.

7.3 Character-defining features of dwellings should not be radically changed, obscured,
damaged, or destroyed by an addition. The existing historical fabric should not be damaged by
the construction of a new addition.

7.4 Additions shall respect the scale and massing of neighboring historic buildings.
Large additions may be required to be divided into smaller components similar in scale to the
original building and neighboring historic buildings.

7.5 Additions should be designed to respect the established front and side yard setbacks present
in the district.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 11
 Advisory Guidelines




 Figure 9 and 10. Additions Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro


 THREE APPROACHES TO REAR ADDITIONS: Adding an extension that dwarfs the
 original structure, as shown in example A, is not appropriate. The addition in
 example B is appropriately scaled and is difficult to see from the street. The addition
 in example C attempts to minimize the visual impact of the newly constructed
 addition on the street.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 12
 Advisory Guidelines




 Figure 11. Building Up Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro

 BUILDING UP: Do not add a full second story to a single story or one and half
 story home. Instead, consider a rear addition that is not visible from the street.
 Dormers that do not face the street may be an economical way to improve
 usable living space. Dormers should be scaled to match those found on
 historical properties in the district.



Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 13
 Advisory Guidelines
8. Architectural Features
The architectural details and features of a dwelling are important stylistic elements that
contribute to its historic character. They should be preserved and should never be removed or
concealed. If a feature is beyond repair, in-kind replacement elements should match the original
as closely as possible in material, design, color, and texture.

Guidelines
8.1 Preserve and maintain historic architectural details and features; do not cover or conceal
them.
The various architectural details of a building together visually convey the distinct historic
character and specific style of the building. To maintain that special quality, these details should
be preserved. Removing or covering original architectural details compromises the visual
appearance of a building and diminishes the historic character of this building and the
surrounding district. Guidelines provide direction for proper care and maintenance, preventing
loss through deterioration of individual elements and overall integrity.

8.2 Cleaning architectural details.
Depending on the material type, some architectural details and features may occasionally need
cleaning to promote their longevity. Generally, the use of water with mild detergent and brushes is
appropriate. For more complicated cleaning jobs, a historic architect or contractor with
experience in historic buildings can provide specific recommendations. Do not use pressure
washers or other abrasive methods on historic materials as they are likely to cause permanent
damage.

8.3 Repair architectural features; return features to their original appearance.
Consult with a historic architect, architectural conservator, or experienced contractor to determine
the appropriate treatment.

 Wood: Deterioration of wood features can be rectified with the application of epoxy to fill in
 small openings. Larger areas of decay should be cut out and re-fitted with pieces of new
 wood.

 Metal: Light corrosion on historic metal features can be gently removed with a wire brush.
 Heavier corrosion may require alternative methods including low pressure grit or sand
 blasting, flame cleaning, and chemical treatment. These treatments are more hazardous, and
 consultation with a professional is recommended. Protect adjacent materials such as brick,
 glass, and wood with some form of temporary covering. Immediately following rust and paint
 removal, metal features should be painted. Epoxies may be used to fill small gaps.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 14
 Advisory Guidelines
8.4 Do not embellish historic buildings; add features only with historical evidence in hand.
The addition of historical architectural details muddles the building’s true historical character and
will often overlay contemporary tastes instead. The best way to highlight a building’s original
character is to ground modifications in archival, photographic, or material evidence that reflect
and extrapolate the building’s earliest design. Some projects may require research into forms and
detailing that would have been used in the region at the time the home was first constructed.

8.5 Replace missing or severely damaged historical architectural detail with in-kind elements that
match the original.
Replacement features should match the original feature in design, proportion, and detail.
Historical photographs, drawings, graphics, or other physical evidence are useful in matching
original features. If no historic documentation is available, select a simple design in keeping with
the building’s historic architectural style and period. The replacement feature should be made of
the same material as the original, but when necessary, substitute materials may be considered if
they successfully match the original detail appearance. The use of substitute materials may be
especially appropriate where they are not readily visible from the street, such as along upper
facades and cornices.

9. Chimneys
Retain and maintain original chimneys. Today, many fireplaces have gas inserts, and chimneys
may only be used to vent furnaces. Even when they are no longer functioning, brick chimney
stacks, their caps, and their decorative corbelling act as a visual reminder of a dwelling’s
historical character. Chimneys should be preserved on dwelling exteriors as an architectural
feature, unless it becomes a safety hazard. Maintain and preserve chimneys in accordance with
the primary materials guidelines.

Guidelines
9.1 Do not remove or alter original chimneys.
Preserve and maintain functioning and non-functioning chimneys. Do not cover chimneys with
stucco or other veneers unless the brick surfaces are in poor condition. Adding chimney caps
made of concrete, slate, unglazed terra cotta or stone are appropriate to improve functionality.

9.2 Follow the guidelines for brick/masonry to promote the longevity of an original chimney.
Use gentle cleaning methods as needed. When repointing is necessary, apply soft mortar
compounds that match the original mortar density.

9.3 An unstable chimney can be rebuilt, matching the original as closely as possible.
An unstable chimney may be rebuilt or otherwise supported with metal straps or brackets
anchored to the roof framing. Use brick or other materials that match historical materials in
shape, dimensions, mortar, color, and brick patterns.

Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 15
 Advisory Guidelines
10. Decks
Rear decks were not widely built until the mid-20th century when they became popular. Decks
are typically not historical elements. As modern features, they should be designed and placed to
minimize their impact on a dwelling’s appearance. Wood decks should only be built at the rear of
dwellings or on non-readily visible side elevations. Installation of decks should not result in the
loss of historic fabric and should be removable.

Guidelines
10.1 Decks, patios, and other outdoor spaces should be located at the rear of dwellings.
If built on the side of a dwelling, the deck should be screened from street view with fencing and/or
landscaping.

10.2 Wood decks should be stained or painted to match or blend with the colors of the dwelling.

10.3 Decks should be simple rather than ornate and of a design that does not detract from the
house, adjacent properties, or the historic district.

10.4 Decks of wood construction are recommended.
Alternative materials, like engineered wood (Trex), may also be appropriate if the deck is not
readily visible and if compatible with traditional materials in texture, design, and overall
appearance.

11. Doors and Entrances
 A dwelling’s entrance acts as a focal point for a home’s stylistic and historical attributes. Several
 elements work together—porches, doors, transoms, sidelights, pediments, and door surrounds—
 to communicate historical character. Preserve and maintain all original entrance elements and
 keep them visible from the public right of way.

Guidelines
11.1 Preserve and maintain original doors and entrances.
Retain and keep in good repair all historic entrance components including jambs, sills, and
headers of openings. Preserve primary doors on the main façade—they are character-defining
features. Enclosing or covering original door openings is discouraged.

11.2 Make repairs to deteriorated or damaged historic doors that do not dramatically alter the
design or materials.
Repair historic doors with methods that retain their historic fabric and appearance as much as
possible. Use epoxy to strengthen deteriorated wood.



Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 16
 Advisory Guidelines
11.3 Replace a door that is beyond repair with a new door that matches the historical original.
Replace a missing original door with a door style identified through comparative research of
historical examples.
Replacement doors should match the original door in materials, pane configuration, panel
arrangement, and dimensions. The new doors should suit the dwelling’s style and date of
construction. Photographs from the building’s historic period are helpful for researching
appropriate styles when replacing doors. Additionally, similar dwellings that retain original doors
may provide guidance for appropriate door design.

11.4 Do not introduce a new door opening where none exists on a readily visible facade.
The installation of a new door opening is an alteration of the dwelling’s façade and compromises
its architectural integrity. This practice is strongly discouraged. A new opening may be permitted
on an elevation out of public view. The new entrance should still be compatible in scale, size,
proportion, placement, and style to historic openings. Side or rear elevations are appropriate
locations for the installation of a new door opening.

11.5 Use storm or screen doors if desired.
Preserve historic screen doors, or select a screen or storm door design that allows full view of the
original primary door. A storm door, security door, or screen door may be added, however these
should be designed with minimal framework and full-view design to maintain visibility of the
original door. These guidelines recommend screen doors made of wood, security doors made
without extensive grillwork, and storm doors made of baked-enamel aluminum, color matched to
the original doorframe.


12. Foundations
Foundations may be both functional and reflect the dwelling’s design and style in texture, and
color. Most foundations in the historic district are brick, stone, or rock-faced and poured
concrete. Preserve and maintain these historic foundation materials. Keep historic foundations in
good repair following the materials guidelines.

Guidelines
12.1 Preserve and maintain original foundations and keep these foundations visible.
Maintain original foundation materials, design, and detailing. The Historic District guidelines
discourage covering or concealing original foundation materials with concrete block, plywood
panels, corrugated metal, or similar materials. Follow Historic District materials guidelines for
cleaning, care, and repair of foundations.

12.2 Follow Historic District materials guidelines for cleaning, care, and repair of foundations.



Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 17
 Advisory Guidelines
12.3 If replacing foundation materials are necessary, match the original as closely as possible.
Use in-kind materials for replacement of original foundations and install using similar construction
techniques.

12.4 Avoid water coming in contact with or penetrating foundations.
Water exposure over time causes deterioration of foundations. Direct downspouts and splash
blocks away from the foundation. Also adjust irrigation systems to keep water a minimum of three
feet away from foundations, with spray directed away from the foundations. Even better, install
drip irrigation lines in foundation plantings to eliminate spray and keep moisture at ground level. It
is also recommended to plant woody shrubs and trees well off the dwelling’s perimeter, as they
can increasingly trap moisture at the foundation as they grow in size and fullness.

12.5 Do not conceal a historic pier foundation.
Treat piers as an architectural asset by keeping them visible. Openings between the piers may be
screened with lattice panels. Cut and fit lattice into the openings, and do not use lattice to cover
piers. Historically, homeowners may have added brick infill between piers, and these should
remain in place. Repair frame lattice panels between brick piers and replace lattice panels in
keeping with traditional designs. Frame lattice panels should be set back from the fronts of the
piers by at least 2 inches. Historically, homeowners may have added brick infill between piers,
and these should remain in place. If brick lattice panels are used, the brick should be similar in
color, texture and mortar joint profile to the original brick piers.

12.6 Foundations should not be painted or stuccoed unless there is historical evidence of this
application. These treatments are only appropriate as means to hide mismatched or
inappropriately repaired brick and/or mortar foundations.


13. Gutters and Downspouts
Gutters and downspouts are essential to protecting a dwelling from the effects of rain and water.
While their presence is functional, they can have aesthetic value through material or color, such
as copper installations that take on a green patina over time or examples intentionally matched
to the trim color of the dwelling.




 Figure 12. Gutters Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro
GUTTER PROFILES: Half round gutters allow better view of exposed rafter tails, a key feature of
 homes in the historic district. Half round is preferred over K-style, Ogee, box, or F-style gutters.

Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 18
 Advisory Guidelines
Guidelines
13.1 Maintain gutters, downspouts, and splash blocks.
Diverting water off the roof and away from the dwelling is essential to home maintenance. Retain
existing boxed or built-in gutters and remove any debris to keep them in good working order.
Repair deteriorated or damaged gutters.

13.2 If original gutters are beyond repair, replace them with gutters of an appropriate type.
For houses built before 1940, half-round gutters are the most appropriate design. Ogee gutters
may be appropriate for buildings dating from or influenced by designs from the 1940s or later. If
new gutters are required, half-round designs, “K” or ogee design aluminum gutters are
appropriate.

13.3 Downspouts should be unobtrusive and should direct away from architectural features.
Appropriately placed downspouts will protect the building and not detract from its historic
character. Direct downspouts away from foundations, including those of neighboring dwellings.

13.4 Gutters and downspouts should be of colors that blend with the dwelling’s main body or trim
colors.

13.5 The use of conductor heads (funnels that direct water from gutters to downspouts), where
appropriate, is encouraged.

14. Lighting
Original light fixtures on early 20th century dwellings are historical assets and should be
preserved or maintained. New, reproduction light fixtures should be compatible with the
architectural style of the dwelling and use traditional materials. Locate reproduction fixtures in
traditionally illuminated spaces, such as flanking the main entrance door or mounted on the
porch ceilings. Inconspicuous accent lighting on sidewalks or in front yards is appropriate.

Guidelines
14.1 Maintain historic light fixtures.
Preserve historic light fixtures as they contribute to the overall historic character of a dwelling.

14.2 Repair original fixtures whenever possible. Replace severely damaged original light fixtures
with reproduction fixtures that match the originals. Replace missing lighting fixtures with
reproduction fixtures selected through comparative historical research.
Original light fixture design may be documented through photographic or physical evidence.
Otherwise, select a design that blends with the style of other historic features of the historic
dwelling. The use of modern, low-wattage, warm white, 3000-3500K bulbs is recommended.



Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 19
 Advisory Guidelines
14.3 Select simple designs appropriate to the character of the building.
If light fixtures of a modern design are desired, they should be inconspicuous and concealed with
landscaping.

14.4 Do not allow light fixtures to damage or obscure architectural features or other building
elements.
The installation of new light fixtures should not damage masonry, siding, or other historic
materials. Illumination should aid visibility without detracting from the building’s historic character.

14.5 Light fixture installed for security, such as flood lights, should be mounted on rear or sides of
buildings rather than on the front.
Floodlights mounted in yards to illuminate the front of the house are discouraged. The
light from yard fixtures should be concentrated on the property and should not illuminate
neighboring properties. Lighting of trees should be minimal. If adding lights to trees,
down-lighting contributes less light pollution than up-lighting.

15. Masonry
The key to preserving historical brick is to keep out water and use a soft mortar whenever repair
is needed. Maintaining mortar and using appropriate cleaning methods are the best ways to
protect brick from water intrusion. The use of hard mortars like Portland cement can cause the
brick to crack and break when shifting temperatures expand and contract masonry. Low pressure
water cleaning and the use of soft mortar mixes are best for brick dwellings. Abrasive cleaning
methods, like sandblasting, erodes the skin of the brick.

Guidelines
15.1 Preserve and maintain original masonry including brick, stone, stucco, terra cotta, cast
concrete, and mortar.
Masonry provides texture, finishes, and patterns that contribute to a dwelling’s distinct
appearance. Proper maintenance of masonry preserves the historic character of a dwelling. Do
not cover or conceal original masonry surfaces with novel materials such as stucco, metal, or
vinyl.

15.2 Do not use abrasive cleaning methods on brick and masonry.
 Abrasive cleaning methods such as sandblasting erodes historic brick surfaces and risks eroding
the integrity of the original material.

15.3 Use the gentlest means possible when cleaning masonry.
Masonry generally needs infrequent cleaning, perhaps to stop deterioration or to remove graffiti
and stains. Mild detergent diluted with water may be used to remove dirt or grime from masonry.


Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 20
 Advisory Guidelines
Gently scrub with a natural bristle brush. Alternatively, a non-harmful chemical solution may be
used. In either case, finish with a low-pressure water rinse. Before applying a cleaning agent to
brick, test it in a small, inconspicuous area to ensure it will not damage or discolor the masonry.

15.4 Do not paint historical masonry.
Unpainted masonry is one of the most low-maintenance exterior building materials, but once it is
painted, it requires repainting with similar frequency as wood siding. If original masonry is at risk
of water penetration, apply a water-repellent coating like Cathedral Stone’s R-97 Water
Repellent. Do not use silicone-based sealants on masonry walls. Silicone sealants do not allow
the brick to “breathe” and can trap moisture within walls. Non-paint treatments are also highly
effective in strengthening damaged sandblasted masonry.

15.5 Do not use power tools on historical masonry.
When mortar is crumbling and needs to be removed and for re-pointing, use hand tools, not
power tools. Hand tools allow for precision work, minimizing the chance for damage to adjacent
brick and stone.

15.6 Preserve original mortar if possible, or repoint as necessary, using mortar mixes similar to
the color and composition of the original.
Before the 1930s, traditional mortar mixes had a high ratio of lime. Portland cement, a harder
mortar, was used in small proportions, if at all. Brick production has also evolved, in composition
and firing method. Therefore, historic brick has a porous property that does not pair well with
hard mortars, which force water through the softer masonry, causing damage. Mechanical
stresses cause expansion, contraction, settlement, and water-driven deterioration mechanisms
like freeze-thaw will also be relieved in the masonry rather than the mortar if the latter is harder
than the former. Modern mortars may also contain harmful soluble salts that further accelerate
brick and stone deterioration. Match new mortar to the original mortar in width, depth, color, joint
profile, and texture.


16. Materials
In the Historic District, the most common materials for façade construction are wood, stone,
brick, and stucco. Foundations are typically of stone, brick, or concrete construction, which may
be covered by stucco. Proper maintenance of historic primary materials is key to preservation;
avoid harsh or abrasive cleaning treatments. Do not cover or conceal historical primary
materials, unless it is wood intended to be painted. Limited replacement of damaged original
materials with matching materials may be considered.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 21
 Advisory Guidelines
Guidelines
16.1 Repair in-kind architectural features with materials, form, scale, and design which match the
original.
Use photo, archival, or physical evidence to select new materials that will best match the scale,
location, proportions, form, and detail of original elements.

16.2 Replace architectural materials which match the original as closely as possible in form,
scale, and design.

16.3 Removal or alteration of original architectural materials from the dwelling should be avoided.

16.4 Do not add inappropriate materials to a building.

16.5 Materials such as Exterior Insulation Finishing Systems (EIFS) and masonry veneers are not
recommended.

16.6 The use of epoxies for wood repair and special masonry repair components may be
appropriate when the extent of damage is relatively small

17. Mechanical Systems and Energy Retrofits (Solar)
Mechanical systems such exterior HVAC system components should be placed at rear
elevations. Systems placed on readily visible facades should be screened by landscaping or
fencing.

Property owners in the historic district may pursue methods for improving overall energy
efficiency. It is important that such concerns be addressed in ways that do not compromise the
character of the dwelling or the district. Many Historic District dwellings were constructed with
wide eaves, large floor-to-ceiling heights, transom windows, and other elements that allow for
natural heating and cooling. Taking advantage of energy-efficient architectural assets and
responsibly retrofitting historic buildings can maximize their potential for energy conservation.

Guidelines
17.1 Modern appliances such as satellite dishes and HVAC units should not be visible from the
public right-of-way.
Locate modern utilities out of public view, especially roof-mounted equipment. Screen HVAC
units, and utility meters with landscaping, lattice panels, or fencing. Mechanical and HVAC
equipment must be screened if visible from the public right-of-way.

17.2 Do not install mechanical systems on primary facades or readily visible side façades unless
the systems are effectively screened with landscaping, fencing, or lattice panels.

Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 22
 Advisory Guidelines
17.3 Window mounted air conditioning units should be mounted on rear or non-readily visible
side elevations whenever possible.
This installation should not result in the loss of the original window. Install with care so that that
modifications are reversible if the unit is removed later.

17.4 Roof-mounted equipment should not be placed on front-facing or public-facing roof planes
and should be set back from the edges of roofs and screened, so that it is not visible to
pedestrians and does not detract from the historic character of the dwelling.

17.5 Retain and preserve the original energy-conserving features and materials that contribute to
the overall character of a building or site, including projecting eaves, porches, front canopies,
shutters, operable windows, transoms, and large trees.

17.6 Increase the thermal efficiency of historic buildings through appropriate, traditional
practices, including the installation of weatherstripping and caulking, storm windows and doors,
insulation in attics, floors, and walls, and, if appropriate, awnings and operable shutters.

17.7 Install new energy upgrades in areas and spaces that will require the least amount of
alteration to the building exterior, historical building fabric and site features.

17.8 Minimize the visual impact of solar panels.
Solar panels should be located on rear rooftops, back yards, or rear accessory buildings that are
out of public view whenever possible. Mount solar panels on rooftops flush with the roofline. If
not attached to the building, locate solar panels in side or rear yards. Do not use hardware,
frames, and piping with a non-reflective finish.

17.9 Property owners may consider the use of reflective roofing surfaces to increase energy
efficiency in warmer months.


18. Paint and Colors
Owners may choose to match the original color of their home with the help of a paint analysis.
Alternatively, owners may choose to select a color palette appropriate to the dwelling’s period
and style. Masonry surfaces which have not been previously painted should not be painted.

Guidelines
18.1 Maintain a building’s original historic painted or unpainted appearance.
Historically painted building surfaces or features should be maintained in paint. Do not paint
unpainted masonry surfaces. If paint has been applied in the past to masonry buildings, then the
continued maintenance of paint is appropriate. Windows should not be painted shut but left
operable.

Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 23
 Advisory Guidelines
18.2 Remove paint using non-abrasive methods, protecting historic materials during the process.
The removal of paint should be undertaken only with non-abrasive methods such as chemical
cleaning, hand-scraping, or hand-sanding. The use of abrasive or high-pressure methods is not
appropriate. Low heat stripping with a heat gun or heat plate, with a temperature of less than 450
degrees, may be used for paint removal. This method softens paint layers by applying heat which
then allows scraping. Buildings constructed prior to 1978 may have lead paint. Test kits for lead
are available, and it is advisable to seek professional assistance if lead is present.

18.3 Remove as little paint as possible.
Remove damaged or deteriorated paint only to the next sound layer. If paint is blistered to the
bare surface level, remove all paint completely.

18.4 Owners are encouraged to use paint colors in keeping with their dwelling’s style and age.
Most commercially available paint companies offer historic color options, and there are numerous
online resources to help you identify appropriate color schemes for each architectural style.
These general color schemes are recommended:
 Greek Revival: Light colors such as white, gray and yellow.
 Frame Vernacular of Folk Victorian: Contrasting wall and trim colors.
 Bungalow/Craftsman: Earth tones, sometimes different colors for different floors, for walls
 and complementary trim.
 Minimal Traditional: Simple, understated pallets, including whites, muted blues and greens, or
 creamy yellows.

18.5. Use appropriate paint.
Use oil-based or latex paint, which will adhere to a previously painted surface. Elastomeric paint
should not be used because it lacks permeability and can trap moisture.


19. Porches
Porches and their components (columns, valances, spindles, piers, stairs, railings and other
wood trim) help express the historic character and architectural style of a dwelling.

Guidelines
19.1 Retain, maintain, and repair wood and masonry porches.
Follow the Historic District materials guidelines for wood and masonry, to maintain and preserve
porches and their elements.

19.2 Repair when possible, replace when necessary.
Retain as much original fabric as possible, replacing only those portions beyond repair. For
example, replace only the damaged spindles and retain the portion of a valance that can be


Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 24
 Advisory Guidelines
repaired. If an entire porch element is beyond repair, replace it completely with a design that
matches the historic design.

19.3 Do not enclose a porch on a primary façade for living space.
An open porch on the primary façade should never be enclosed with glass, wood siding, brick or
other material. If enclosing a porch is desired, use screen panels with minimal structural
elements. Fit the screen sections between the porch columns, posts, or other original divisions.
The original openings should remain visible. Porches on rear or non-readily visible side facades
may be enclosed with glass or wood panels as long as there is no removal of extensive historic
fabric and as long as the enclosure work is reversible.

19.4 Carefully select any alternative materials.
Wood and plastic composite products may be appropriate substitutes for historic wood porch
floors. If an alternative material is used, choose a product that resembles wood and matches
typical dimensions of wood floorboards. The porch floor should be painted to blend with the
house colors.

19.5 Porches missing their original columns and balusters should be rebuilt based upon
photographic or physical evidence.
If no evidence exists, porches should be rebuilt in keeping with porches of houses built in a
similar style of the same period. Wood columns are recommended but the installation of columns
of alternative materials may be appropriate if they match historic designs in dimensions and
overall appearance. Balusters (also called spindles) should be carefully sized for any
replacement porch.

19.6 Retain historic porch steps and railings.
Retain historic porch steps and railings whenever possible. Replace individual sections of porch
stairs and railings, if possible, rather than a complete replacement. Use materials that match the
porch’s materials.

19.7 Do not install pre-cast concrete steps on front porches.
If replacement of original steps is necessary, do not replace them with pre-cast concrete steps on
entrances that are readily visible from the street.

19.8 Keep replacement railings simple and in kind with original.
Match replacement railings in style and appearance to the original railing. Simple painted wood
railings with balusters between the top and bottom rail are appropriate. It is important to contact a
building safety representative to discuss safety requirements for railings, including height.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 25
 Advisory Guidelines
20. Roofs
Original roof forms are a key character defining feature that must be preserved and maintained.
Replacement of roofing material, for example re-shingling, does not require review by the
Commission, however a change in materials or roof shape or structure must be reviewed.
Sanborn Fire Insurance maps can be a helpful tool to determine historic roofing material. Please
see the Mandatory Guidelines section on Roofs for additional information.

Guidelines
20.1 Retain historic roof shapes and features.
Preserve roofs in their original size, shape, and pitch. Retain original materials and decorative
elements, and roof features such as eaves, brackets, parapets, cornices, and chimney flues.
Historic roof materials such as metal standing seam, slate and clay tile should be repaired and
preserved.

20.2 Preservation of a historic buildings depends on good roof maintenance.
Inspect for and repair leaking roofs, gutters, and downspouts. Proper ventilation prevents
condensation, which promotes decay. Anchor roofing materials solidly to prevent wind and water
damage.

20.3 If an entire roof is beyond repair, wholesale replacement may be necessary.
If the original roof is not salvageable, replacing the entire roof with new roofing materials may be
appropriate. The new materials should be compatible with the historic character of the dwelling
and the district and should match original materials as closely as possible.

20.4 Do not introduce new elements that compromise the building’s historic character.
Skylights, balconies, and mechanical equipment are modern amenities that should be placed out
of public view and should not obscure original features. Rear roof planes are typically the most
appropriate location for installing these features.

20.5 New dormers shall not be introduced on front façades but new dormers may be added on
rear façades or secondary façades which are not readily visible and if the dormers are in keeping
with the character and scale of the structure.

21. Signs and House Numbers
The Historic District is primarily residential in character, but there are sign provisions for home
businesses. The Fayetteville Sign Ordinance should be referenced, and normal application
procedures for sign permits shall be followed. Many sign types that are acceptable in areas
zoned for commercial activity are inappropriate for a residential neighborhood. Free-standing or
monument signs are not allowed. Wall signs and hanging signs are appropriate signs for
residences.

Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 26
 Advisory Guidelines
House numbers can use a wide range of typefaces and should generally conform to the historical
character of the neighborhood.

Guidelines
21.1 Placement and scale of primary signs
In the Historic District signs may be placed on the front wall of the house or hanging from the
porch eave. The sign should not exceed 2’-0” in either dimension and not exceed four square feet
in size. The sign should be made of compatible materials, such as wood or simulated wood.

21.2 Freestanding or monument signs are not permitted.

21.3 Internally illuminated or plastic-faced signs are not appropriate for the District.

21.4 Sign text should be set in a typeface that reflects the early 20th century or the period when
the structure was constructed.

21.5 House address text and numerals for commercial and residential properties shall be set in a
typeface that reflects the early 20th century or the period when the structure was constructed and
shall not dramatically exceed the scale of house address text or numerals of historical properties
in the district.

22. Windows
Windows are often referred to as the “eyes of the home,” and are vital to preserving the historic
character of a dwelling.[1] Preserve, maintain, and repair original windows in the Historic District.
If original windows are beyond repair, replace them with windows that closely match the original
design. Historic District guidelines suggest using wood windows as a first option. New windows
should match the original windows’ opening size, number of panes, and configuration of lites.
Preserve the original window configuration of readily visible elevations. Do not cover or enclose
original windows: original window openings should not be enclosed for the addition of smaller
windows.

The installation of storm windows can help in lowering energy costs and are appropriate as long
as they are full-view design or match the window’s design.




[1] National Trust for Historic Preservation, “Repair or Replace Old Windows: A Visual Look at the
Impacts,” https://www.westonma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/15438/Repair-or-Replace-A-visual-look-
at-the-impacts-PDF. National Trust for Historic Preservation, “Historic Wood Windows,”
https://www.westonma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3040/Overview-of-Wood-Windows-Tips-from-the-
National-Trust-for-Historic-Preservation-PDF.
 Advisory Guidelines
Guidelines
22.1 Preserve and maintain original windows, particularly on primary elevations.
Window openings, windows, window details, and the size and shape of these elements help
establish rhythm, scale, and proportion of buildings and reflect architectural style and character.
These are important character-defining features of a dwelling and windows on primary elevations
should be preserved, repaired as needed and retained.

22.2 Keep wood windows in good condition. Repair parts as needed, replace missing panes or
deteriorated sashes, rather than entire windows.
Make repairs as necessary, using epoxy to strengthen wood where it has deteriorated. Replace
as little of the original window materials as necessary. Retaining as much historic window
elements as possible will help ensure the building’s historic character and appearance.
Preserving the original size, shape, and pattern is key.

22.3 Preserve, maintain, and repair original metal windows.
During the mid-20th century, metal windows such as steel, aluminum, and bronze were widely in
use. Preserving these materials as well as their original designs and details helps convey a
sense of time and architectural style. Make repairs with materials that match the original as
closely as possible.

22.4 Replace original windows if they are beyond repair, and install replacements that match the
size, materials, and design. Take care to match the configuration of lites: the number and
arrangement of these smaller panes often seen on the upper sash of Craftsman windows are
important in establishing the historical character of a home.
Ideally, original wood windows would be replaced with wood windows. Fiberglass composite
windows and aluminum-clad windows may also be appropriate alternatives. Vinyl and vinyl-clad
windows do not accurately replicate historic windows and are discouraged in the Historic District
guidelines. Replace original metal windows with like materials. Replacement windows should
match the appearance of historic wood or metal window through appropriate dimensions, depth
of frame, and the appearance of true divided lites. If original hardware from the removed windows
is sound and operational, salvage and re-use this hardware with the replacement windows.

22.5 Replacement windows should not have snap-on, flush, or simulated divided muntins.
The Historic District guidelines do not recommend windows that feature muntins sandwiched
between layers of glass, snap-on muntins, or surface-applied muntins.

22.6 New window openings should not be added to primary façades or to readily visible side
elevations.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 28
 Advisory Guidelines
22.7 Clear glass should be used in windows on the primary and readily visible side elevations.
Do not use reflective, tinted, patterned, or sandblasted glass in windows. The addition of these
glass materials may be used on rear elevations or those not readily visible. Stained glass should
be preserved where it existed historically.

22.8 Shutters that are original to the dwelling should be preserved and maintained. Repair
historic wood shutters with in-kind materials.

22.9 Replace severely damaged original wood shutters with wood reproductions that match the
original. Replace missing shutters with reproductions selected through comparative historical
research. Make sure these fit the window opening. New shutters should be of louvered or
paneled wood construction.
All shutters shall be appropriately sized to fit the window opening so that if working and closed,
they would cover the window opening.

22.10 When installing window screens, use full-view screen panels made of wood or metal
frames to allow the visibility of the historic window.

22.11 When installing storm windows, select full-view designs or designs that match the original
window’s design. Storm windows should be wood or metal frames. Metal storm windows should
be anodized or baked-enamel surfaces and not unfinished metal.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 29
 Advisory Guidelines
 Why Preserve Original Windows
 The Economic, Historic, and Environmental Arguments

 Windows are a significant part of the original fabric of historical structures. They
 provide important architectural qualities that define and characterize an
 architectural style and time period, as well as the scale of a building and/or historic
 district. The loss of windows alters the defining qualities of the historic fabric,
 structure, and/or historic district.

 Rebuilding historical wood windows and adding storm windows makes them as
 efficient as new windows and more than offsets the cost of installation. Several
 comprehensive window studies have found that a wood window sealed with
 weatherstripping and covered with a storm window is as energy efficient as most
 new thermo-pane windows. These studies also find these maintained wood
 windows last longer.[2]

 The old-growth lumber used in historic window frames can last if well maintained,
 unlike new-growth wood, vinyl, or aluminum.

 In most cases, windows account for less than one-fourth of a home’s energy loss.
 Insulating the attic, walls and basement is a more economical approach to
 reducing energy costs than replacing historic windows.

 Any energy savings from replacing wood windows with aluminum or vinyl seldom
 justifies the costs of installation. For most buildings, it would take decades to
 recover the initial cost of installation, and with a life expectancy of 10 to 15 years
 or less, installing new vinyl or aluminum windows does not make good economic
 sense.




[2] Kimberly Konrad Alvarez and John D. Alvarez II, “Restoring Our Appreciation of Historic Wood
Windows: Making a Case for Restoration Versus Replacement,” New York State Office of Parks,
Recreation and Historic Preservation,
https://www.westonma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/15436/Making-a-case-for-Restoration-v-
Replacement-PDF. Shanon Peterson Wasielewski, “Windows: Energy Efficiency Facts and Myths,”
Washington Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation,
https://dahp.wa.gov/sites/default/files/Windows%20Energy%20Efficiency%20Facts%20and%20Myths
.pdf. Community Preservation, “’Old’ Wood Window/Replacement Window Energy Analysis,
https://www.communitypreservation.org/sites/g/files/vyhlif4646/f/uploads/windowenergyanalysis.pdf
 Advisory Guidelines
23. Wood Siding
 Original wood siding materials should be preserved and maintained. If replacement is required it
 should be with materials to match the original as closely as possible. Always avoid concealing
 original wood siding materials with vinyl, aluminum, or other synthetic sidings because these
 materials do not successfully imitate the appearance of historic, wood siding. Synthetic materials
 are not “breathable” and may cause condensation and damage to the original siding beneath.
 Asbestos shingle siding is not hazardous as long as it is kept painted and encapsulated. If an
 owner is concerned about the potential hazard of the asbestos shingles they may be removed
 and replaced with appropriate alternative materials which match the original shingles as closely
 as possible.

 Guidelines
 23.1 Preserve and maintain original wood siding.
 The texture, scale, and shape of original wood siding helps define a dwelling’s historic character
 and architectural style. Original wood siding is significant to the fabric of a structure, and new
 materials cannot adequately mimic its finish. Removal of original siding compromises a building’s
 architectural integrity.

 23.2 Repair original siding when necessary and replace only if it is beyond repair.
 Regular maintenance of siding will ensure its longevity. A finished surface can be achieved with
 the application of an opaque stain. If replacement of siding is necessary due to deterioration,
 match new siding to the original in size, placement, and profile. Often commercially available
 products may not provide an exact match; it is recommended to consult with a carpenter for
 custom work when feasible.

 23.3 Avoid synthetic or substitute materials such as vinyl and aluminum.
 Synthetic sidings do not adequately mimic the organic appearance of traditional materials and
 degrade a building’s historic character. Replacement or concealment of original wood materials
 with vinyl, aluminum or other synthetic materials is discouraged.
 When using vinyl or aluminum siding, these new materials should match the existing wood profile
 and be properly vented. New siding installation should not conceal window or door trim and
 should not require the removal or concealment of architectural details.

 23.4 Clean siding by the gentlest means possible.
 Use a soft-bristle brush, mild soap, and low-pressure rinsing with a garden hose. Do not attempt
 to clean original siding with potentially destructive, dangerous, and/or abrasive cleaning
 techniques, such as propane torching, sand-blasting, or water-blasting.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 31
 Advisory Guidelines - Setting
The neighborhood’s “hilly, leafy setting” as described by Cy Sutherland and Gregory Herman in
the Society for Architectural Historians Archipedia is vital to the Historic District’s character.[3]
Setting is so important that it is one of the seven aspects of integrity that is used to evaluate the
ability of a property to convey its historic significance. Properties are more than just the primary
building; they are articulated with features such as accessory buildings, fences, walls, lighting,
terraces, waterways, swales, fountains, patios, sculptures, arbors, pergolas, pools, furniture, and
planters. Circulation patterns and intended use is deﬁned with walkways, streets, alleys,
driveways, and parking areas.

Like site features, plantings such as hedges, foundation plantings, lawns, gardens, and tree
canopies play a signiﬁcant role in creating the character of the historic district. Sutherland and
Herman help us understand the special connection the Historic District has with our historic city
park. They write, “Floral gardens complement the grounds of many of the houses, visually
connecting them with the extensively planted beds of neighboring Wilson Park.” Plantings may
also reﬂect the regional climate. Historically, large shade trees were an important means of
providing summer cooling to homes without air conditioning. Today, they still contribute shade to
cool the neighborhood and provide distinctive character to the historic district. Mature trees are
irreplaceable community assets.

24. Driveways
The location of driveways and their spacing, dimensions, and materials are an important part of
the historic district’s streetscapes. Parking areas are best placed on side and rear elevations of a
dwelling, not in front yards. Traditional paving materials such as gravel, brick, stone, and
concrete are encouraged over black asphalt and similar modern materials. The Historic District
guidelines encourage use of permeable paving materials for driveways and parking areas.
Permeable materials reduce neighborhood flooding by allowing water to be absorbed into the
ground. Much of the Historic District was constructed when automobiles were new consumer
products. As a result, district driveways and parking areas often reflect the smaller scale of this
early car culture.

Guidelines
24.1 Preserve original driveway materials such as crushed gravel or concrete. Original designs
such as concrete “ribbon” driveways—two narrow ribbons of concrete that mimic tire treads—
contribute to the distinctive, early 20thcentury character of a property and should be preserved.




[3] Cyrus A. Sutherland, with Gregory Herman, Claudia Shannon, Jean Sizemore, and Jeannie M.
Whayne, Buildings of Arkansas (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2018). See also Cyrus
A. Sutherland, with Gregory Herman, Claudia Shannon, Jean Sizemore, and Jeannie M. Whayne
“Wilson Park and Rock Houses,” SAH Archipedia, https://sah-archipedia.org/buildings/AR-01-WA20.
 Advisory Guidelines - Setting
24.2 Limit driveway and curb cut widths to the width of a single car.
Driveways and curb cuts should be limited in width to preserve the setting of the district and
reflect the smaller scale of early 20th century automobiles.

24.3 Driveways and parking areas in side and rear yards should be of gravel (white or pea
gravel), decomposed granite, brick, stone, concrete, textured concrete, or concrete ribbons
(narrow strips).
Non-historical materials such as asphalt are discouraged.

24.4 Screen and minimize the visual impact of parking areas in rear or side yards with hedges,
shrubs, or fences.

24.5 Parking areas on vacant lots between buildings should align edge screening with front
façades of adjacent buildings.
On corner lots, they should have edge screening on both the primary and secondary street.

24.6 Sidewalks and driveways should be oriented perpendicular to the street.
If historical documentation provides evidence of curvilinear designs or other shapes and designs
on that site or other similar house styles, such shapes may be appropriate.

24.7 Locate new driveways and walkways so that the topography of the dwelling site and
significant landscape features, such as mature trees, are retained.
Protect mature trees and other significant landscape features from direct construction damage or
from delayed damage such as destruction of root area or soil compaction by construction
equipment.

24.8 Locate new additions so that the topography of the dwelling site and significant landscape
features, particularly mature trees, are retained.
Protect mature trees and other significant landscape features from direct construction damage or
from delayed damage such as destruction of root area or soil compaction by construction
equipment.


25. Fences and Gates
The installation of new fences in keeping with traditional locations, designs and materials is
appropriate for the historic district. Vinyl and similar synthetic fencing materials are inappropriate
for the district in front and readily visible side yards.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 33
 Advisory Guidelines - Setting
Guidelines
25.1 Preserve historic fences.
Historic fence materials such as stone, brick, and wood should be preserved and maintained.

25.2 Repair or replace fence or wall materials with in-kind materials.

25.3 Installation of new wood picket fences in front yards or privacy wood fences in side or rear
yards is appropriate if they are in traditional and permitted dimensions and designs.
Privacy fences constructed of wood board should only be located in rear yards and generally not
exceed 6 feet tall.

25.4 Cast iron fences may be added to buildings constructed in the mid- to late-19th and early
20th centuries.
Cast iron fences are not appropriate for dwellings built after the mid-20th century.

25.5 Chain link, concrete block, rolled wire, or synthetic materials are not recommended for the
historic district in front yards or readily visible side yards. Split or horizontal rails, railroad ties, or
timbers are also not recommended for front yards or readily visible locations.

25.6 Fence posts, rails, and other framing members should be on the inside of the fence facing
the dwelling or adjacent property rather than the street and sidewalk.

25.7 Fence gates should be designed to be compatible with the overall fence design and
consistent with the age and style of the dwelling.

26. Retaining Walls
Low retaining walls of brick, stone, or ﬁnished concrete are common in the Historic District. Many
of these walls enclose either a planting edge or simply the front lawn. Existing low walls are to be
preserved. Any changes beyond in-kind repair or restacking of existing retaining walls requires
review by the Historic District Commission. Please see the Mandatory Guidelines for more
information.

Guidelines
26.1 Preserve and maintain original or historic retaining walls whenever possible.
Typically built of stone, brick or concrete, ensure historic retaining walls are in good condition and
repointed when needed. Follow the maintenance recommendations for these materials.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 34
 Advisory Guidelines - Setting
27. Garages and Outbuildings
Outbuildings such as garages, sheds, carriage houses and smokehouses are part of the
historical and architectural significance of the historic district. These structures reflect cultural
changes over time. Historical outbuildings should be preserved and maintained. They should be
repaired with materials and details to match the original.

Guidelines
27.1 Preserve and maintain historic outbuildings.
Preserve and maintain original outbuildings such as garages, carriage house and sheds, as they
contribute to the history of a property.

27.2 Original outbuildings should be repaired with materials to match the original.
If original garage doors on contributing buildings are missing or damaged, sectional overhead
roll-up doors and side-hinged doors of wood in historic designs are appropriate. For non-
contributing outbuildings these designs are also recommended and doors of metal, composite,
and other alternative materials may be appropriate.

27.3 Replace damaged or deteriorated sections of historic garages and accessory structures,
only if deteriorated beyond repair and with in-kind materials to match the original.
Where possible, replace only the damaged or deteriorated portions rather than the entire feature.

27.4 Outbuildings were often built without gutters and those of frame construction may have
deterioration of the sills and lower siding materials. If this is the case, consider only repairing
these damaged areas rather than replacing the entire structure.


28. Walkways
Walkways which lead from the public sidewalks to dwellings display a variety of materials. Some
dwellings retain their brick and stone walkways laid in the 19th and early 20th centuries while
others have concrete walkways original to the dwelling. Property owners should repair and retain
historic walkway materials as long as possible. If replacement is needed, materials should match
the original as closely as possible or owners may substitute traditional materials such as stone,
brick and concrete. New walkways with these materials are appropriate. Permeable paving
materials may also be appropriate.The use of asphalt for walkways is not appropriate and the
use of this material is discouraged.

Guidelines
28.1 Repair historic walkway materials with in-kind materials.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 35
 Advisory Guidelines - Setting
28.2 Replace historic walkways if determined to be non-repairable with in-kind or compatible
materials.

28.3 Retain existing historic walkway materials such as brick, stone, and concrete.

28.4 Replace damaged areas with in-kind materials as closely as possible.

28.5 New paving materials should be in traditional materials such as brick, stone, and
 concrete.

28.6 Avoid paving materials such as asphalt, bright white or tinted concrete, and other non-
traditional materials and colors.

28.7 Permeable paving surfaces for walkways may be appropriate if they have the appearance of
traditional materials.

29. Landscaping
Landscaping is a critical part of the historic district's appearance. All property owners should
make the effort to identify and retain existing trees and plants that help deﬁne the character of
the area. Installing native, drought-tolerant plantings compatible with the existing neighborhood
will further enhance the appeal of the area and retain the historic setting.

Guidelines
29.1 Retain and preserve the building and landscape features that contribute to the overall
historic character of the district, including trees, gardens, yards, arbors, ground cover, fences,
accessory buildings, patios, terraces, fountains, ﬁsh ponds, and signiﬁcant vistas and views.

29.2 Retain and preserve the historic relationship between buildings and landscape features of
the district setting, including site topography, retaining walls, foundation plantings, hedges,
streets, walkways, driveways, and parks.

29.3 Protect and maintain historic building materials and plant features through treatments,
including routine maintenance and repair of constructed elements and pruning and vegetation
management of plantings.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 36
 Advisory Guidelines - Setting
 29.4 Native significant trees [4] should be preserved.
 a. Replace a seriously diseased or severely damaged tree or hedge with a new tree or
 hedge that at maturity is of similar size and quality and appropriate for the climate. There
 are many options for native, durable species. Speak with one of the City’s Urban Foresters,
 or view the Recommended Tree List.
 b. It is inappropriate to remove, healthy, mature trees.
 c. Design new construction or additions so that large trees and signiﬁcant site features,
 such as vistas, are preserved.
 d. Protect large trees and signiﬁcant site features from immediate damage during
 construction and from delayed damage due to construction activities, such as loss of root
 area or compaction of the soil by equipment. It is especially critical to avoid compaction of
 the soil within the drip line of trees. Use tree protection fencing as advised by the Urban
 Forester.
 29.5 Replace missing or deteriorated site features in kind or with new compatible substitute
 materials that maintain the character of the site and the historic district.

 29.6 It is not appropriate to alter the topography of a site substantially through grading, ﬁlling, or
 excavating, nor is it appropriate to relocate drainage features, unless there is a speciﬁc problem.




[4] Significant Tree: A tree with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of 24 inches or more for fast
growth species, 18 inches or more for slow and moderate growth species, and 8 inches or more for
understory species. A tree may also be considered significant because of advanced age for its
species, or because it represents an uncommon or endangered species, or due to its location on a
site designated as historic by local, state or federal authorities. Source: City of Fayetteville Tree
Preservation, Protection, and Landscape Manual.
 Advisory Guidelines - Setting
 INVASIVE SPECIES NATIVE TO ARKANSAS ALTERNATIVE SPECIES


 Asian wisteria (Wisteria sinense / floribunda) American Wisteria (Wisteria frutescens)


 Bigleaf / Littleleaf Periwinkle (Vinca major / Vinca Partridge Berry (Mitchella repens)
 minor) Allegheny Spurge (Pachysandra procumbens)

 Bradford Pear (Pyrus calleryana) Flowering Dogwood (Cornus florida)


 Fragrant Sumac (Rhus aromatic)
 Burning Bush (Euonymus alatus)
 Black chokeberry (Aronia melanocarpa)

 Bush Honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii / Carolina Buckthorn (Rhamnus caroliniana)
 fragrantissima) Winterberry (llex verticillata)

 Rusty Blackhaw (Viburnum rufidulum)
 Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense)
 Yaupon Holly (llex vomitoria)

 Creeping Euonymus (Euonymus fortune) Moss Phlox (Phlox subulata)
 Common Bearberry (Arctostphylos uva-ursi)

 Virginia Creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia)
 English Ivy (Hedera helix)
 Allegheny Spurge (Pachysandra procumbens)

 River Cane (Arundinaria gigantea)
 Golden Bamboo (Pyllostachys aurea)
 Yaupon Holly (llex vomitoria)

 Carolina Buckthorn (Rhamnus caroliniana)
 Heavenly Bamboo (Nandina domestica)
 Virginia Sweetspire (Itea virginica)

 Coral Honeysuckle (Lonicera sempervirens)
 Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica)
 Trumpet-Creeper (Campsis radicans)

 Virginia Creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia)
 Kudzu (Pueraria montana)
 American Wisteria (Wisteria frutescens)

 Golden currant (Ribes aureum)
 Multiflora Rose (Rosa multiflora)
 Climbing Rose (Rosa setigera)

 Round Bush Clover (Lespedeza capitate)
 Serica Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata)
 Big Bluestem (Andropogon gerardii)

 Fringetree (Chionanthus virginicus)
 Silktree, Mimosa (Albizia julibrissin)
 American Smoketree (Cotinus obovatus)

 Blue Wild Indigo (Baptisia australis)
 Shrubby Lespedeza (Lespedeza bicolor)
 Roundhead Lespedeza (Lespedeza capitate)

 Kentucky Coffee-Tree (Gymnocladus dioicus)
 Tree-of-Heaven (Ailanthis altissima)
 Kentucky Yellowwood (Cladrastis kentukea)



Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 38
 Advisory Guidelines - Setting
 NOT RECOMMENDED
 Some trees are not recommended as they are made vulnerable by climate change, common diseases,
 and pests or have the potential to become invasive.




 These include, but are not limited to:
 Bradford Pear (Pyrus calleryana)
 Chinese Pistache (Pistacia chinensis)
 Cottonwood (Populus deltoides)
 Eastern Red Ceder (Juniperus virginiana)
 Fringe Tree (Chionanthus virginicus)
 Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
 Japanese Zelkova (Zelkova serrata)
 Lacebark Elm (Ulmus parvifolia)
 Non-native Pines (Pinus taeda, Pinus strobe, etc. Pinus echinata is the only Pinus species native to the
 Ozarks)
 Persian Silk Tree (Albizia julibrissin)
 Sawtooth Oak (Quercus acutissima)
 Silver Maple (Acer saccharinum)
 Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum)
 White Ash (Fraxinus americana)




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 39
 Appendices
Terminology
Terminology in the Guidelines
There is a set of terms common to guidelines in general. This terminology is used throughout the
Design Guidelines and reflects the principles that the Commission will consider when making
decisions. These terms and their interpretation are as follows:

Appropriate
The term “appropriate” applies to a component, method, or design choice that is sensitive to the
historic quality of a building and overall district. When “appropriate,” the project will be in
compliance with the guidelines.

Beyond Repair and Beyond Reasonable Repair
The terms “beyond repair” and “beyond reasonable repair” describe deterioration that cannot be
reversed. The damage to the building or feature is so extreme that not enough physical material
remains for its repair. The burden of proof to demonstrate “beyond repair” will be the
responsibility of the applicant.

Character
The term “character” means the attributes, qualities, and features that collectively convey the
essence of a setting, place, or building.

Compatible and Compatibility
The terms “compatible” and “compatibility” mean “appropriate.” Compatibility also means the
characteristics of different uses or activities that permit them to be located near each other in
harmony and without anticipated conflict.

Inappropriate
An “inappropriate” feature, action, or design choice compromises the historic character of a
building or district. An inappropriate project would not be in compliance with the design
guidelines.

In-Kind and Like-Kind
When repair or replacement of specific elements of materials are needed, “in-kind” and “like-kind”
substitutes match the existing, original, or historic in material, size, detail, profile, finish, texture,
and appearance as closely as possible, and when installed will not be easily
distinguishable from the original upon close inspection.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 40
 Appendices
Recommended
The term “recommended” means suggested, but not mandatory actions outlined in the
guidelines.

Shall or Should
Where the terms “shall” or “should” are used, compliance is specifically required.

Visible or Readily Visible
The terms “visible” or “readily visible” means easily visible from public streets and rights-of-way,
including through parking lots and other open spaces.


Planning Your Project
Projects involving a historic structure or new construction within the Historic District and any
locally designated district may include a variety of approaches, including maintenance, simple
repairs, or additional living space. By understanding the history and architectural development of
a structure and its use, its present condition and the actions necessary to complete your project,
you can develop an overall approach. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards address four
types of projects:
 Preservation: Keeping an existing structure in its current state by initiating a program
 of maintenance and repair.

 Rehabilitation: Actions to return a structure to its original state by preserving features
 that contribute to its historic character. This can also include using appropriate in-kind
 or replacement materials, adaptive reuse and adding compatible additions. Most
 projects taken before the Commission for existing buildings would be considered
 rehabilitation.

 Restoration: This process involves reconstructing the appearance of the structure as it
 looked from a particular period of time.

 Reconstruction: Reconstruction is defined as the act or process of depicting by means
 of new construction the form, features and architectural character of a structure that no
 longer exists. This type of project typically involves replicating a historic structure to a
 particular point in time—often for interpretive purposes.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 41
 Appendices
After the project approach has been identified, the property owner should refer to this manual
and apply the design guidelines in the initial stages of planning and design. The primary
approach of the Commission and the design review guidelines emphasizes preservation instead
of removal/replacement and the use of sustainable practices and materials where possible.
These principles are demonstrated in the use of words such as repair, retain, maintain,
compatible and replace in-kind. When planning a rehabilitation or new construction project, the
Commission encourages property owners to consider a series of steps in their planning.

One—What Is the Significance of the Property?
What is the age of the property and how has it changed over time? Does the building contribute
to the character of the historic district through its architectural design? The Commission and Staff
can assist in determining if a property is contributing or non-contributing.

Two—What Is the Building’s Condition and Integrity?
A building with historic and architectural integrity will retain most of its character defining features
on its primary and secondary elevations that are visible from the street. A property’s degree of
integrity will help determine the desired outcome of the project.

Three—What Is the Intent of the Project?
Some projects may only require upgrades to interiors which are not reviewed by the Commission.
Exterior changes may be limited to in-kind repair and replacement or involve entire structure
rehabilitation. Projects may also involve adding living space to a historic structure.

Four—What Is the Proposed Project Treatment Plan?
An appropriate project treatment plan will be developed once the historical significance, integrity
and project intent has been determined. A project may include a variety of actions such as
maintenance of some elements, repair of deteriorated materials, replacement of deteriorated
materials, in-kind or replacement of deteriorated materials with compatible new materials, and
construction of an addition or ancillary building.

When reviewing a property owner’s proposed project treatment plan the Commission will be
guided by a series of principles as follows:
 Proposed projects should emphasize retaining, maintaining, preserving, and repairing original
 or historic features.
 If such features and elements cannot be retained, maintained, preserved, and repaired, then
 replacement in-kind is recommended. Replacement in-kind means that the new feature and
 element match the existing original, or historic material in size, detail, profile, finish, and
 texture as closely as possible. Architectural details and materials can be documented through
 drawings, photographs, or physical evidence. Such documentation will aid in defining
 appropriate rehabilitation activities.

Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 42
 Appendices
 If material replacement in-kind is not feasible or practical, the Commission may consider the
 use of appropriate alternative materials that match the original as closely as possible in
 texture, design, and overall appearance.
 Rehabilitation will be reviewed to determine the impact, compatibility, and appropriateness of
 the proposed work to the existing structures, site, streetscape, and district.
 Rehabilitation shall be compatible with the historic building or structure for which it is
 proposed. Compatible rehabilitation efforts are those that protect and retain significant
 architectural features and elements of individual buildings and the district.
 New construction for primary buildings and outbuildings shall be compatible with adjacent
 buildings along the street and blockface in massing, scale, materials, and setback.

Five—What Must be Submitted to the Commission for Review?
In addition to a completed Certificate of Appropriateness application, the Commission also
requires the following for specific projects:
 New retaining walls: A sample or photo of the proposed wall material.
 New exterior materials: A sample or photo of the proposed exterior material.




Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 43
 D
 R
 AFT
 Oak Grove
  Historic District
Mandatory Design Guidelines
Acknowledgements
 THANK YUO THANK YOU THANK YOU INSERT




D
 R
 AFT
 Table of Contents
Preface
  Introduction to Oak Grove .............................................. 3
  Purpose ........................................................................... 7
  General Application of Guidelines ................................. 8
Mandatory Guidelines
  New Residential Construction ....................................,..10
 Primary Dwellings...................................................10

 D
 Garages and Outbuildings .....................................14
 Sidewalks and Rights-of-Way ................................16

 R
 Retaining Walls........................................................16
  Changes to Historic Properties......................................17




 FT
 Roofs........................................................................17
 Relocation of Historic Buildings.............................18
 Retaining Walls .......................................................19

 A
  Demolition of Historic Properties...................................20
 Demolition ...............................................................20
Appendices
  Terminology ....................................................................28
  Planning Your Project .....................................................29
 Introduction to Oak Grove
The Oak Grove Historic District preserves a residential neighborhood located near
Fayetteville’s Wilson Park and within walking distance of the Fayetteville Square, Dickson
Street, and the University of Arkansas campus.

Originally platted as Oak Grove Addition
—a name referring to the many post oak
trees in the area, many of which still stand
today—the neighborhood is characterized
by its wooded natural setting and rustic
topography, its distinct vernacular
architecture, and its significance in
Fayetteville’s history.


 D
The neighborhood was largely
developed by Dr. Noah F. Drake, a


 R
University of Arkansas geologist who
helped establish City Park, later known
as Wilson Park—the first public park in
 Figure 1. 1908 Plat Map of Oak Grove Addition.
 Portion in proposed district outlined in red.




 FT
Fayetteville and a much-beloved outdoor space for the city’s residents today. Born on a farm
in Washington County in 1864, then educated at Cane Hill College and Arkansas Industrial
University (now the University of Arkansas) in civil engineering (class of 1888). Drake
eventually completed his PhD in geology at Stanford University in California in 1897 and


 A
 spent many years thereafter as a professor of geology in
 Tianjin, China, where he was involved in petroleum mining.
 In 1911, Drake moved back to the United States, first
 teaching at Stanford before returning to Arkansas in 1912.
 Upon his return to Fayetteville, Drake resided in a home
 within the present boundary of the Oak Grove Historic
 District at 513 North Highland Avenue, then bought many
 nearby lots in the Oak Grove Addition and the neighboring
 Englewood Addition that he would soon develop.




 Figure 2. Noah Fields Drake. Source: Orange County
 California Genealogical Society (Vera Wade Drake).


Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 3
 Introduction to Oak Grove
These include the corner lot on Maple Street
and Forest Avenue, where he built his own
family home: a house that recalls the iconic
California Craftsman Bungalow through its
large front porch, overhanging roof, and
exposed rafter tails, but also includes unusual
features, like its terracotta tile roof, which
perhaps recalls the tiled roofs on Stanford’s
campus or the local architecture of Tianjin, a
reference recorded in Drake’s family
correspondence. Figure 3. Drake’s Family Home



 D Drake also built the many “Rock Houses” in the
 neighborhood, including a distinct series of homes on
 West Davidson Street and North Park Avenue. These

 R houses are defined by their use of local sandstone on
 their exterior facades. Drake created his own rock
 house style distinct from the “Ozark giraffe,” named for




 FT
 its resemblance to the distinctive patterning of giraffe
 hides, evoking his background as a geologist and
 representing an innovative use of local materials in
 this region.
 Figure 4. 16 Davidson

 A
Other residential properties in the Historic District
incorporate wood shingles, stucco, and natural
materials, creating a charming connection between
nature and architecture; houses are set in landscaped
plots defined by rock work, large trees, and gardens.
As explained in a study of the notable historic
structures throughout Arkansas, these homes are
“subtle in their distinctions, romantic in their image.
Their hilly, leafy siting contributes to their desirability.
... Floral gardens complement the grounds of many of
the houses, visually connecting them with the Figure 5. 603 Park
extensively planted beds of neighboring Wilson Park.”[1]


 [1] Cyrus A. Sutherland, with Gregory Herman, Claudia Shannon, Jean Sizemore, and Jeannie M. Whayne,
 Buildings of Arkansas (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2018), 54.
 Introduction to Oak Grove
The neighborhood was home to significant figures in the city’s and University of
Arkansas’s early history. Drake, for example, purchased City Park in 1926 and developed
it with a pool and stone tourist cottages, three of which still stand, before selling it to the
City of Fayetteville in 1944. He experimented with cultivating native walnut trees at his
orchard and farm in North Fayetteville; some of these trees still dot the streets of Oak
Grove. Drake also provided money for purchasing the first portion of land at Drake Field,
the municipal airport located in South Fayetteville; the White Hanger at Drake Field is now
preserved as a Local Historic District.

 Other figures who lived in the boundaries
 of the Historic District are also significant
 in local history. Superintendent Wayne
 White (515 Forest Avenue) integrated the

 D Fayetteville School District in 1954—
 Fayetteville was one of the very first


 R districts in the former Confederacy to
 desegregate, and did so peacefully. Dr.
 Harry R. Rosen (509 Forest Avenue)




 FT
 advanced the science of crop production
 and is the namesake for the University’s
 Rosen Center for Alternative Pest Control,
 located up the road on Maple Street. His




 Figure 6. 515 Forest
 A terraced backyard was once used for
 cultivating new varieties of garden roses
 which he bred and released, including
 Miriam’s Climber, named for his daughter.

 George Clifton Wade (501 Forest Avenue) served as a member of the Arkansas Senate
(1955-1971) and a member of the Arkansas House of Representatives (1947-1955).


 The intent of the Oak Grove Historic District is to
 preserve this unique neighborhood—a cohesive and
 intact example of Ozark vernacular residential
 architecture and neighborhood design—for the future.


Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 5
 Introduction to Oak Grove
 The Oak Grove Historic District was created by Fayetteville City Council on
 XXXXX, 2026 (Ord. No. XXX).




 D
 R
 AFT

 Figure 7. Proposed Oak Grove Local Historic District


Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 6
 Purpose
 The design guidelines for the Oak Grove Historic District provide the HDC and property
 owners with best practices for residential rehabilitation[2] and new construction. The
 guidelines are practical approaches to specific design elements common for dwellings
 built in the early 20th century.

 Rehabilitation assumes that at least some repair or alteration of the historic building will
 be needed to provide for efficient contemporary use; however, these repairs and
 alterations must not damage or destroy materials, features, or finishes that are important
 in defining the building's historic character. Design guidelines aim to provide acceptable
 solutions to adapting historic buildings for modern lifestyles, striking a balance between
 function and preservation. The guidelines allow for change when it is accomplished in a
 sensitive manner that maintains the special character of the Historic District while meeting


 D
 the practical needs of the residents and property owners. The guidelines direct the HDC,
 staff, and property owners in making appropriate decisions in the physical appearance of
 exterior elements of historic properties regarding primary residential buildings, as well as

 R
 their associated outbuildings, site features, landscaping, driveways, walkways, and
 overall streetscapes.




 FT
 Of particular importance to the HDC and Historic District residents is preventing
 demolition of significant resources. Demolition of properties which contribute to the
 character of the district should only be a last resort and the burden of proof to justify
 demolition will be the responsibility of the property owner.


 A
 Figure 8. Oak Grove Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro

[2] "Rehabilitation" is defined as "the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair
or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and
 features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural and cultural values.”
 General Application of Guidelines
The following guidelines only apply to exteriors; interior changes are not reviewed by the
Historic District Commission.

CORE TENENTS
 1. Always repair existing original elements when possible.
 2. When replacing original elements damaged beyond repair, match as closely as
 possible.
 3. When replacing a missing element, research comparable historical examples to inform
 selection of a replacement.
 4. When altering a historical element, take care to make changes that are reversable.
 This will allow future owners to restore historical elements to their original
 appearance.


 D
 5. Keep historical elements visible. Be gentle when cleaning. Take steps to keep them
 dry.



 R
SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARD FOR REHABILITATION
The following standards, prepared by the federal government, serve as general principles
for historic preservation of buildings in the United States and complement the core tenets




 FT
articulated above.

  1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that
 requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and
 environment.

 A
  2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. Avoid the
 removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a
 property.
  3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.
 Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding
 conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be
 undertaken.
  4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic
 significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.
  5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of
 craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 8
 General Application of Guidelines
  6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the
 severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature
 shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where
 possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by
 documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.
  7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic
 materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be
 undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
  8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and
 preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be
 undertaken.
  9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy


 D
 historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated
 from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural
 features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.


 R
 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a
 manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic
 property and its environment would be unimpaired.




 AFT

Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 9
 New Residential Construction
The following guidelines are mandatory for new construction within the Historic District.

1. Primary Dwellings
New construction of primary dwellings in the Historic District should maintain the pattern of
existing historical structures in the neighborhood. New primary dwellings must carefully address
multiple design considerations: setback; distance between homes; scale; materials; window size,
style, and placement; and site features. New design should blend with, but need not attempt to
replicate, historic dwellings. The general approach to new construction is for it to be compatible in
character and scale with adjacent dwellings. Compatible means reinforcing typical features that
dwellings display along the block. Architects and property owners are encouraged to design
houses compatible with the context of the lot and the historic dwellings along the block.
Appropriately scaled replications or reproductions of historic designs are acceptable but not
required for the historic district.

Guidelines D
1.1 Maintain existing historical patterns.


 R
New primary dwellings shall reinforce the historical patterns along the block. Follow typical
setbacks, materials, height, width, roof shapes, scale, and proportions. Setbacks are determined
by the underlying zoning designation and may change via rezoning. Current setbacks should be




 FT
checked using the City’s zoning map. Most houses in the District are set back a minimum of 15’
from the property line. This minimum setback is strongly recommended for new construction.

1.2 Orientation towards the street.



 A
New dwellings should be oriented towards the major street.

1.3 Maintain existing patterns of building height.
New dwellings shall be compatible with adjacent dwellings in terms of height. New dwellings
should fall within the range of existing homes on the streetscape. Building height is measured
from the average grade of the public street across the width of the building. Under the current
zoning designations, the maximum height allowed in the district for new construction is three
stories, but most houses are one to two stories in height, some with basements and attics. This
maximum two-story height is strongly recommended for new construction. Note: Structures not
originally designed as a residence shall not be considered a primary dwelling for the purposes of
limiting building height and scale nor for understanding the intent of this article 1.3 and the
following article 1.4.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 10
 New Residential Construction




 D
 Figure 8. Heights Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro
 BUILD IN SCALE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD: Structure height is measured from
 the average grade of the public street across the width of the building. Here structure


 R
 A is the shortest, B is the tallest, and C maintains this existing pattern of build height
 by rising between heights A and B.

 1.4 Maintain existing scale along the street.




 FT
 New dwellings shall be compatible with adjacent primary dwellings in terms of scale and
 proportions.

 1.5 Maintain existing patterns of roof form.



 A
 Roof form of new dwellings should be compatible with those of adjacent dwellings. Roof pitch
 shall be 4:12 minimum. Appropriate roof types include gable or hip with a dormer at the front
 façade if desired.

 1.6 Maintain historical setting designs.
 New construction should follow the traditional designs of setting such as location of retaining
 walls, driveway placement and outbuilding placement. Parking spaces should be located at the
 side or rear of the dwelling and not in front of the house or in front yards.

 1.7 Match materials of surrounding dwellings.
 New dwellings should use traditional primary materials on their exteriors:

 Foundations: Within the Historic District, brick, stone, stucco, or concrete (not
 bare concrete block) are appropriate for foundations, piers, chimneys, and lower
 column piers. Foundations may be covered with real stone veneer.



Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 11
 New Residential Construction
 Retaining Walls: Within the Historic District, brick, stone, stucco, or concrete (not bare
 concrete block) are appropriate for retaining walls. Walls may be covered with real stone
 veneer.

 Siding: Within the Historic District, siding materials shall be wood or simulate the
 appearance of wood. Appropriate siding includes beveled siding, lap siding, and shingle
 siding. These materials appear in the historical homes in this district. Vinyl siding is
 discouraged; other engineered materials, like fiber-cement (Hardie products) better
 replicate wood. However, vinyl siding is allowed when installed with appropriate trim and
 fascia details in the historic district. Siding shall not protrude beyond the face of door and
 window frames and frieze boards. Materials such as faux-stone and Exterior Insulation
 Finishing Systems (EIFS) will not be approved as a siding material on new construction.
 Real stone and brick veneer is permitted.


 D
 Windows and Doors: For windows and doors, modern materials may be appropriate, and
 materials that simulate the appearance of wood are preferred. Hung windows (double,
 single, etc.) and grouped windows are appropriate. Large picture windows are not

 R
 permitted as they are most commonly associated with Ranch-style homes, which are not
 found in the District.




 AFT

 Figure 9. Example of existing windows on 14 Davidson


Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 12
 New Residential Construction
 Porches: Because porches are traditional focal points of Historic District facades, new
 primary dwellings should have front porches. Porches should be at minimum one-half of
 the total width of the front façade. Minimum depth of the front porch should be 7’ - 0”
 deep.

 Porch Columns and Posts: Porch columns and posts shall be wood or materials that
 simulate the appearance of wood, stone, or brick. Column/post types may include turned,
 rounded, rectangular, or square. These may have chamfered (beveled) corners or be
 fluted. Porches set on tapered piers may have pyramidal columns.

 Chimneys: Use traditional masonry (brick, stone, stucco, etc.) for chimneys whenever
 possible. Chimneys may be clad in the same material as the dwelling exterior. Chimneys
 that are not masonry, however, shall not be clad in the same material as the dwelling
 exterior beyond the point of roof penetration. Above that point, a properly installed

 D
 galvanized stove pipe type chimney shall be required. Chimney stacks must start at grade
 and shall not cantilever.



 R
 AFT
 Figure 10. Chimneys Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro

 CAREFULLY CONSIDER MATERIALS: Chimneys finished with the siding
 should not use this siding material above the roof penetration. Do not float the
 chimney stack.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 13
 New Residential Construction
 Roofs: Appropriate materials for roofs of new dwelling include metal (low-profile strong
 back, corrugated, V-crimp), slate, terra cotta, or asphalt composition shingles. Craftsman
 details, such as exposed rafter tails and widely overhanging eaves can improve the
 compatibility of new construction within the established neighborhood.

1.8 Locate new additions so that the topography of the dwelling site and significant landscape
features, particularly mature trees, are retained.
Protect mature trees and other significant landscape features from direct construction damage or
from delayed damage such as destruction of root area or soil compaction by construction
equipment.

2. Garages and Outbuildings
New garages and outbuildings should generally be secondary in scale and compatible with
adjacent dwellings. Compatible means reinforcing typical features, such as roof pitches, eave

 D
depth, materials, proportions and location of openings, architectural details, etc., found on the
primary dwelling or other dwellings and outbuildings along the block. Reproductions of historical
designs are also appropriate.

Guidelines R
2.1 Design new garages and other accessory buildings to be compatible with existing properties




 FT
within the Historic District.
Design new garages and accessory buildings to be compatible with the architectural style and
secondary in scale to the associated dwelling. Prefabricated accessory structures are only
appropriate when the design is compatible with the main structure or similar to historic accessory



 A
structures within the district. Most prefabricated accessory structures will not meet this standard.

2.2 New garages and accessory buildings shall be sited appropriately on the lot.
Locate new garages and outbuildings to the rear of a dwelling or set back from the side
elevations. Attached garages and accessory buildings shall be set back from the front façade of
the primary dwelling at least one-third of the total depth of the dwelling.

2.3 Reconstruction of a missing or replacement garage or outbuilding shall be based on
historically grounded evidence of the original configuration, form, massing, style, placement, and
detail. The historical accuracy of a reconstruction design should be confirmed with photographs
or other documentation of the original building or similar buildings.
With proper documentation, historic garages and outbuildings may be constructed in locations
that do not conform to the underlying zoning district, if fire code and life safety requirements are
met.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 14
 New Residential Construction
2.4 The design of new garages and outbuildings should be secondary to that of the primary
historic dwelling.
Generally, new garages and outbuildings should be smaller and less ornamented than the
primary historic dwelling.

2.5 Materials used for new garages and outbuildings should reflect historical development of the
property.
Materials used at exterior façades of garages and outbuildings were often different (and less
costly) than that of the main dwelling. Materials that are appropriate for new secondary buildings
include wood or brick. If frame buildings are constructed, alternative materials may be considered
if they resemble traditional wood siding in texture, dimension, and overall appearance. Materials
such as T1-11 siding are not sufficiently durable for exterior use and are not appropriate.



 D
2.6 Metal garage doors with a paneled design may be appropriate.
These doors can be used on garages that are located at the back of the lot and are minimally
visible from the street or public right-of-way. If the garage and garage doors are highly visible


 R
from a public street or located on a corner lot, solid or paneled wooden garage doors are more
appropriate.




 FT
2.7 Garages accommodating more than one vehicle, like double or triple garages, shall be
constructed with single width garage doors rather than larger, double doors. Garage doors shall
not exceed the width of a single vehicle.
Single width doors maintain the scale and rhythm of older structures, making a larger garage
seem smaller and more compatible with the primary dwelling.


 A
2.8 Ancillary outdoor features such as gazebos, arbors, trellises, etc. may be appropriate if they
are located at rear or side elevations and not readily visible from the public right-of-way. These
features should be scaled appropriately to their site. Ancillary outdoor features do not require
review if they are under 10 ft. by 10 ft. in area.
Such structures should be scaled to the site, adequately screened, and built with materials
traditionally found in the historic district such as wood or brick. These features should
complement the architectural design of the dwelling or main building.

2.9 New carports should be located at the rear of dwellings and not visible.
Most carport designs have flat roofs and metal support columns and are not compatible with
historic dwelling designs. Carports imitative of porte-cocheres (drive-thru wings on historic
dwellings) with wood or brick columns, flat roofs, and wood construction may be added to sides
of dwellings visible from the street. Carports should be reflective of the architecture of the house
and not detract from the dwelling’s original design.



Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 15
 New Residential Construction
3. Sidewalks and Rights-of-Way
Sidewalks are an integral part of the Historic District. Sidewalks should be constructed and/or
repaired for all street frontages and shall match the historic width or the prominent width along
the street. Sidewalks shall pass through driveways.

Many of the platted streets in the Historic District were originally laid out with 30–45-foot rights-
of-way. The Fayetteville Master Street Plan requires that all Residential Link Streets have a
minimum of 45 feet of street right-of-way and are improved with a six-foot sidewalk, six-foot
greenspace, and one-and-a-half-foot curb and gutter. This regulation is based on larger lot
suburban standards developed in the mid-20th century. The Master Street Plan also requires that
all Urban Center Streets have a minimum right-of-way of 39 feet and are improved with an eight-
foot sidewalk, four-foot greenspace, and one-and-a-half-foot curb and gutter. The Historic District
shall allow construction without the requirement of dedication of additional street right-of-way,


 D
upon the granting of a variance by the Planning Commission. The smaller street rights-of-way of
the District are a desirable feature and should be preserved.


4. Retaining Walls
 R
Low retaining walls of brick, stone, or ﬁnished concrete are common in the Historic District. Many
of these walls enclose either a planting edge or simply the front lawn. Existing low walls are to be
preserved. Any changes beyond in-kind repair or restacking of existing retaining walls requires




 FT
review by the Historic District Commission. All new retaining walls require review by Historic
District Commission.

Guidelines


 A
4.1 Preserve and maintain original or historic retaining walls whenever possible.
Typically built of stone, brick or concrete, ensure historic retaining walls are in good condition and
repointed when needed. Follow the maintenance recommendations for these materials.

4.2 New retaining walls should be of traditional historic materials and be of similar height to
existing retaining walls along the street. Avoid rectilinear, cut stone blocks in favor of rough cut or
rubble stone. Poured concrete or concrete block walls must be covered with stone veneer.

4.3 Bare concrete block, re-cast simulated stone, railroad tie, and landscape timber retaining
walls are prohibited in the Historic District.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 16
 Changes to Historic Properties
The following guidelines are mandatory for changes of historical structures within the
Historic District.

5. Roofs
Original roof forms are a key character defining feature that must be preserved and maintained.
Replacement of roofing material, for example re-shingling, does not require review by the
Commission, however a change in materials or roof shape or structure must be reviewed.
Sanborn Fire Insurance maps can be a helpful tool to determine historic roofing material.
Additions that disrupt the original roof form may require additional review from the Historic District
Commission.

Guidelines
5.1 Retain historic roof shapes and features.
Preserve roofs in their original size, shape, and pitch. Retain original materials and decorative

 D
elements, and roof features such as eaves, brackets, parapets, cornices, and chimney flues.
Historic roof materials such as metal standing seam, slate and clay tile should be repaired and
preserved.

 R
5.2 Preservation of historic buildings depends on good roof maintenance.
Inspect for and repair leaking roofs, gutters, and downspouts. Proper ventilation prevents




 FT
condensation, which promotes decay. Anchor roofing materials solidly to prevent wind and water
damage. Check seams of metal roofs.

5.3 If an entire roof is beyond repair, wholesale replacement may be necessary.



 A
If the original roof is not salvageable, replacing the entire roof with new roofing materials may be
appropriate. The new materials should be compatible with the historic character of the dwelling
and the district and should match original materials as closely as possible.

5.4 Do not introduce new elements that compromise the building’s historic character.
Skylights, balconies, and mechanical equipment are modern amenities that should be placed out
of public view and should not obscure original features. Rear roof planes are typically the most
appropriate location for installing these features.

5.5 New dormers shall not be introduced on front façades but new dormers may be added on
rear façades or secondary façades which are not readily visible and if the dormers are in keeping
with the character and scale of the structure.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 17
 Changes to Historic Properties
6. Relocation of Historic Buildings
Moving a contributing building in a historical district is strongly discouraged. It should only be
considered after all other approaches to protect a historical dwelling on its site have been
exhausted, and relocation to a compatible vacant lot for rehabilitation becomes the last resort.
Before the Historic District Commission approves relocation of a historical dwelling, it will
carefully evaluate the conditions that give rise to both the threat of demolition and subsequent
proposal of relocation.
Guidelines
6.1 Relocating dwellings and outbuildings should be in accordance with the design guidelines for
new construction and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.

6.2 Relocating dwellings and outbuildings that contribute to the historic and architectural
character of the district out of the Historic District should be avoided unless demolition is the only
alternative.
 D
6.3 Relocating a building into the Historic District may be appropriate if:


 R
 [1] it is compatible with the district's architectural character through style, period, height,
 scale, materials, setting, and placement on the lot, and;
 [2] its location on the new site will be consistent with its original location and will respect




 FT
 the front and side yard setbacks, orientation, and foundation heights of the neighboring
 properties.

6.4 All features should be adequately protected, and windows and doors boarded or braced in the
least damaging manner.


 A
6.5 Relocated buildings should be carefully rebuilt and placed on a foundation which replicates
the original using masonry material compatible with traditional foundations. Salvaging and reuse
of original foundation materials is strongly encouraged.

6.6 Porches and chimneys or any other projections that cannot be raised with the building should
be carefully dismantled.
Each member should be numbered and recorded to rebuild onto the building in the same place
and manner at the new site. The chimney should be reconstructed using the removed materials
with new mortar that matches the original in color, content and consistency. Any repair materials
should match in kind to the original.

6.7 Buildings relocated into the Historic District must meet the guidelines for new construction,
unless, as originally built, a building would have met the criteria for a contributing structure in this
Historic District. If a building would have been considered contributing, it will be subject to the
guidelines for existing structures.

Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 18
 Changes to Historic Properties
7. Retaining Walls
Low retaining walls of brick, stone, or ﬁnished concrete are common in the Historic District. Many
of these walls enclose either a planting edge or simply the front lawn. Existing low walls are to be
preserved. Any changes beyond in-kind repair or restacking of existing retaining walls requires
review by the Historic District Commission. All new retaining walls require review by Historic
District Commission.


Guidelines
7.1 Preserve and maintain original or historic retaining walls whenever possible.
Typically built of stone, brick or concrete, ensure historic retaining walls are in good condition and
repointed when needed. Follow the maintenance recommendations for these materials.

7.2 If it is necessary to reconstruct a dry-stack wall with mortar, recess the mortar joints so that it


 D
is not visible from the front of the wall, retaining the appearance of dry-stack.

7.3 New retaining walls should be of traditional historic materials and be of similar heights to


 R
existing retaining walls along the street. Avoid rectilinear, cut stone blocks in favor of
rough cut or rubble stone.




 AFT
 Figure 11. Stone examples, from “A Field Guide to
 American Houses,” Virginia Savage McAlester


7.4 Bare concrete block, stone veneer, pre-cast simulated stone, railroad tie, and landscape
timber retaining walls are prohibited in the Historic District.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 19
  Demolition of Historic Properties
The following guidelines are mandatory for demolition of historical structures within the
Historic District.

8. Demolition
All demolitions within the Historic District must be reviewed and approved by the Historic District
Commission prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. Demolition of dwellings that contribute
to the historic or architectural significance of the Historic District should only be an action of last
resort. Demolition of existing structures that are 50 or more years old within the Historic District
must be approved by the Commission. Demolition through neglect is prohibited, and owners who
do not conform to maintenance codes may be subject to legal action.

The Commission will need ample evidence that a dwelling cannot be rehabilitated, and
consultation with experts, such as licensed architects and engineers, may be necessary. The


 D
burden of evidence is on the applicant. A decision can only be reached after thorough analysis of
the structure’s history and extant condition through documentation provided by the applicant
and/or external experts. If the building is planned for demolition to accommodate new


 R
construction, expansion of another building, or new development, the Commission may not
consider the future replacement designs and may not review redevelopment plans until after the
demolition decision is reached.




 FT
Guidelines
8.1 Demolition of a building that contributes to the historic or architectural significance of the
historic district shall not occur, unless:



 A
 public safety and welfare require the removal of the building or structure;
 the building has lost its architectural and historic value or the building does not contribute to
 the historical or architectural character of the Historic District;
 the building’s removal will improve the architectural and historic integrity of the district. The
 removal will not adversely impact the integrity of the historical streetscape and the historic
 district.

8.2 In order for the Commission to approve demolition of a contributing building, the applicant
should submit an application that includes [i] historic background and archival research, [ii]
thorough documentation of the current state of the building and property, and [iii] a plan for the
dismantling and removal of historic materials for salvage. Materials to be salvaged include
historic timber framing, windows, doors, mantels, newel posts, balusters, moldings, flooring,
hardware, metalwork, brackets, weatherboard, brick, stone, other masonry components, and any
other interior or exterior decorative elements.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 20
  Demolition of Historic Properties
8.3 Relocation of contributing structures is preferrable to demolition, however relocation is not
preferable to restoration in situ. The owner is encouraged to consider moving the building to
another location within or near the historic district. The Commission may pursue measures with
the owner and other parties to preserve the contributing building.

8.4 A licensed and qualified structural engineer or architect with experience in historic buildings
should assess the condition of the subject building to evaluate the viability of relocation as an
alternative to demolition.
This assessment should estimate and enumerate the damage that relocation would inflict on the
structure for the Commission to review. In situations involving contributing properties, further
expert consultation by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program and others may be necessary.

8.5 A plan for protecting mature trees and major vegetation must be submitted to the Commission
as part of a demolition application. If demolition is approved, this tree preservation plan must be

 D
shared with the demolition general contractor. The general contractor will be responsible for
outlining the plan for subcontractors and posting it onsite for employees to review. The demolition
must be accomplished in a manner that preserves existing trees and major vegetation, in order

 R
for the Commission to grant or maintain approvals for redevelopment of the site.

8.6 If approved, the demolition should be accomplished in a manner which recycles as many




 FT
materials as possible and has minimal environmental impacts on adjacent properties.
The Commission may request a plan from the applicant prior to demolition which outlines
materials to be salvaged, such as architectural details, wood flooring, bathroom and kitchen
fixtures, and other recyclable items. Demolition should be conducted by qualified professionals to



 A
minimize exposing neighbors and pets to hazards.

8.7 Pest control abatement should occur prior to demolition.
Properties which have been vacant for lengthy periods of time may have infestations of rodents
or insects and must be abated prior to demolition.

When is Demolition Review Needed?
Requests for demolition of any portion of or the entirety of any building, structure, or object shall
require review by the Historic Preservation Commission when such demolition request affects:
 a. More than twenty-five percent (25%) of any exterior street façade of a building, structure
 or object;
 b. More than twenty-five percent (25%) of any combination of exterior foundations, walls,
 and/or roofs;
 c. Any purposefully designed landscape by a notable individual; or
 d. A significant, naturally occurring land or geological formation when such building,
 structure, object or site has been designated as a Historic Landmark or has been included
 within a designated Historic District.

Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 21
  Demolition of Historic Properties
 Demolition shall be considered only when all other redevelopment options for a building,
 structure, object, improvement, or site have been exhausted.




 D
 R
 AFT

 Figure 12. Demolition Flowchart,
 Illustration: Martin Schapiro


Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 22
  Demolition of Historic Properties
A. Demolition Review Procedure
Application Standards
A complete demolition permit application shall contain the following:

 a. a legible, dimensioned, and accurate property map indicating location of all
 improvements proposed for demolition;
 b. written affidavit of the owner(s) of record of the property acknowledging the proposed
 demolition;
 c. sketched floor plans of all levels of the building or structure proposed to be demolished;
 d. photographs of all existing conditions including all exterior elevations, all significant
 architectural features (exterior and interior), and all rooms or spaces (exterior and interior)
 affected by the proposed demolition work;
 e. historic images of the property and general area of proposed work, if available;

 D
 f. a written chain of title investigation that identifies previous owners of the property upon
 which demolition is proposed;
 g. a detailed report of non-code-compliant elements and structural deficiencies, prepared

 R
 by a registered architect and/or structural engineer with expertise in the rehabilitation of
 existing and/or historic properties;
 h. a detailed list of irreparable or deteriorated building features, components or elements;




 FT
 i. a detailed cost estimate for the rehabilitation of the improvement, property, or site,
 prepared by a design professional or licensed contractor with expertise in the renovation of
 existing and/or historic properties;
 j. a comparison of the estimated rehabilitation cost of the property proposed for demolition



 A
 with market values for comparable improvements, properties, or sites within the municipal
 boundaries;
 k. a detailed cost estimate for the restoration of the site in the event that no new
 construction activity commences following demolition;
 l. a summary of potential sites, if any, to which the resource could be relocated within the
 Historic District with an estimate of the cost of the move to each proposed location, if any,
 by a qualified building mover;
 m. a proposed schedule for demolition activities;
 n. detailed protection plan for mature trees and vegetation.
 o. other reasonable information required by City ordinance or that may be requested by
 City staff




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 23
  Demolition of Historic Properties
Commission Action
The Commission shall consider only the property, building, structure, architectural feature, or
object proposed for demolition; the merit of any proposed redevelopment, reconstruction, or
improvement shall not be a standard of review for a demolition request. The Commission may
solicit expert testimony to evaluate information provided in the demolition application or at a
public hearing. A public hearing may be continued to a later date if the Commission determines
that additional information unavailable at the public hearing is warranted and necessary for a
finding of fact.

Additionally, the Commission may table the request to the next regularly scheduled meeting of
the Commission to provide time to fully evaluate new evidence presented at the public hearing.

The Commission may continue a public hearing regarding a request for demolition for a specified
period of time, not -to-exceed one hundred and twenty (120) calendar days, for the sole purpose

 D
of allowing the applicant and the Commission to seek alternatives to demolition when the
Commission determines that all of the following conditions exist:


 R
 a. the historical structure itself, or the structure in relation to its environs, has significant
 historical, architectural, aesthetic or cultural value in its present condition;
 b. realistic alternatives for preservation of the historical structure—including adaptive




 FT
 uses—are believed to be neither cost prohibitive nor beyond the limits of local market
 value; and
 c. the historical structure, in its existing condition, does not present a public health or
 safety hazard to individuals, neighboring properties or the greater community.



 A
The Commission may bring a request back to the table for discussion, when an applicant has:

 a. made a bona fide and reasonable, but unsuccessful, effort to locate a purchaser for
 the property who is willing to preserve, rehabilitate, or restore the historical structure,
 property, or site;
 b. made a bona fide and reasonable, but unsuccessful, effort to locate a purchaser for
 the improvement who is willing and able to relocate the historical structure to another
 property or site;
 c. made a bona fide and reasonable, but unsuccessful, effort to develop a cost-effective
 program for the preservation of the historical structure; and
 d. agreed to accept a demolition permit on specified conditions of the Commission.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 24
  Demolition of Historic Properties
Documentation
An applicant may be required, as a condition of demolition approval, to prepare and submit, prior
to the issuance of a demolition permit the following documentation:

 a. Site Plan (scale not less than 1-inch equals 20’-0”);
 b. Floor Plans of each level (scale not less than 1/8” equals 1’-0”);
 c. Elevations of each side of the property improvement (scale not less than 1/8”
 equals 1’-0”); and
 d. Photographs of each elevation and significant, interior or exterior architectural
 feature as determined by the Commission (clear, color images).
The Commission may grant a demolition request for a property within the Historic District if, upon
review of all testimony, the maintenance, use, and/or alteration of the property would cause
immediate and substantial hardship for the owners of record because rehabilitation in a manner
which preserves the architectural, historic, or structural integrity of the property either:

 D
 a. is infeasible from a technical, mechanical, or structural perspective; or
 b. would leave the property with no reasonable economic value because it would


 R
 require an unreasonable expenditure when accounting for such factors as current
 market value, permitted uses of the property, and/or the cost of compliance with
 local, state, and federal codes applicable to the property.




 FT
The Commission, by a simple majority vote, shall grant or deny the application for demolition.

Site Restoration
Upon completion of any approved demolition, a site must be restored and maintained as required



 A
by City Code until such time that construction activity resumes at the property.

Lapse of Demolition Approval
Any approval granted by the Commission or Circuit Court for the demolition, in whole or in part,
of any building, structure, object, improvement, or site shall be valid for a period of twelve (12)
months from the date of the issuance of a demolition approval. Failure to complete the approved
work in a timely fashion will require the re-application for approval of any outstanding demolition
work.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 25
  Demolition of Historic Properties
B. Standards for Demolition Request Review
The Historic District Commission shall make findings related to a demolition request based upon
the evidence presented to it in each specific case and shall not approve a proposed demolition
unless demolition action improves or corrects one or more of the following conditions:

 1. the historical structure constitutes a hazard to the safety and welfare of the general public or
 occupants of the improvement, property, or site as determined, in consultation with the City
 Planner, Building Official, Code Enforcement Officer, Chief of Police, and Fire Chief;
 2. retention of the property will cause undue economic hardship to the owner of record when a
 governmental action, an act of God, or other events beyond the control of the applicant
 created the hardship and all feasible alternatives to eliminate the financial hardship (which
 may include sale of the property at fair market value or relocation of the improvement to
 another site) have been attempted and exhausted by the applicant; or


 D
 3. the retention of the property is not in the best interest of the majority of the community.

C. Demolition by Neglect and Deferred Maintenance

 R
Buildings, structures, and objects lying within the boundaries of a Historic District shall be
maintained and protected from demolition that results from neglect or undeterred deterioration of
the exterior features or structural elements.




 FT
 1. Duty to Maintain. Any building, structure, or object lying within the boundaries of a Historic
 District shall be preserved against material deterioration of exterior features and structural
 elements by its owner of record.



 A
 2. Duty to Repair. The owner of record for any building, structure, or object lying within the
 boundaries of a Historic District shall, upon written notice from the City Code Enforcement
 Department, or other representative on behalf of the City, repair any deficient element that is
 contributing to material deterioration, including, but not limited to, damage to or decay of:
 a. foundations, flooring, or floor supports that causes leaning, sagging, splitting, listing, or
 buckling of all or part of the building, structure, or object;
 b. walls or other vertical supports that causes leaning, sagging, splitting, listing, or buckling
 of all or part of the building, structure, or object;
 c. ceilings, roofs, and their support systems or other horizontal members, that causes
 leaning, sagging, splitting, listing, or buckling of all or part of the building, structure, or
 object;
 d. fireplaces or chimneys that causes leaning, sagging, splitting, listing, or buckling of all or
 part of the building, structure, or object;
 e. exterior finishes, including, but not limited to wood, brick, stone, stucco, mortar or other
 material;


Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 26
  Demolition of Historic Properties
 f. any design detail, significant feature, or structural element that results in any appreciable
 loss of architectural, historic, or structural integrity of the building, structure, or object;
 g. any window, window frame, door, or doorway that, individually or collectively, results in
 any appreciable loss of architectural, historic, or structural integrity of the building,
 structure, or object;
 h. any feature intended to provide a watertight condition that results in significant moisture
 infiltration into the building, structure, or object; or
 i. any feature or element that results in the creation of a fire hazard or other nuisance to the
 welfare of the general public; and
 j. any vacant property, historic property, or archaeological site within a Historic District shall
 be adequately secured against unauthorized entry.


D. Natural Destruction or Demolition

 D
In the case of partial or complete destruction or demolition of a building, structure, object,
improvement, or site within a Historic District as a result of an act of God or other natural
disaster, the property may be completely demolished without Commission review provided that


 R
the Building Official, Fire Department Chief, and Chief of Police, in consultation with the City
Planner, jointly determine the improvement is structurally unsound and poses an immediate or
imminent nuisance and/or hazard to the general health, safety, and welfare of the public.




 AFT

Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 27
 Appendices
Terminology
Terminology in the Guidelines
There is a set of terms common to guidelines in general. This terminology is used throughout the
Design Guidelines and reflects the principles that the Commission will consider when making
decisions. These terms and their interpretation are as follows:

Appropriate
The term “appropriate” applies to a component, method, or design choice that is sensitive to the
historic quality of a building and overall district. When “appropriate,” the project will be in
compliance with the guidelines.

Beyond Repair and Beyond Reasonable Repair
The terms “beyond repair” and “beyond reasonable repair” describe deterioration that cannot be


 D
reversed. The damage to the building or feature is so extreme that not enough physical material
remains for its repair. The burden of proof to demonstrate “beyond repair” will be the
responsibility of the applicant.

Character
 R
The term “character” means the attributes, qualities, and features that collectively convey the




 FT
essence of a setting, place, or building.

Compatible and Compatibility
The terms “compatible” and “compatibility” mean “appropriate.” Compatibility also means the



 A
characteristics of different uses or activities that permit them to be located near each other in
harmony and without anticipated conflict.

Inappropriate
An “inappropriate” feature, action, or design choice compromises the historic character of a
building or district. An inappropriate project would not be in compliance with the design
guidelines.

In-Kind and Like-Kind
When repair or replacement of specific elements of materials are needed, “in-kind” and “like-kind”
substitutes match the existing, original, or historic in material, size, detail, profile, finish, texture,
and appearance as closely as possible, and when installed will not be easily
distinguishable from the original upon close inspection.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 28
 Appendices
Recommended
The term “recommended” means suggested, but not mandatory actions outlined in the
guidelines.

Shall or Should
Where the terms “shall” or “should” are used, compliance is specifically required.

Visible or Readily Visible
The terms “visible” or “readily visible” means easily visible from public streets and rights-of-way,
including through parking lots and other open spaces.


Planning Your Project

 D
Projects involving a historic structure or new construction within the Historic District and any
locally designated district may include a variety of approaches, including maintenance, simple
repairs, or additional living space. By understanding the history and architectural development of


 R
a structure and its use, its present condition and the actions necessary to complete your project,
you can develop an overall approach. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards address four
types of projects:




 FT
 Preservation: Keeping an existing structure in its current state by initiating a program
 of maintenance and repair.

 Rehabilitation: Actions to return a structure to its original state by preserving features



 A
 that contribute to its historic character. This can also include using appropriate in-kind
 or replacement materials, adaptive reuse and adding compatible additions. Most
 projects taken before the Commission for existing buildings would be considered
 rehabilitation.

 Restoration: This process involves reconstructing the appearance of the structure as it
 looked from a particular period of time.

 Reconstruction: Reconstruction is defined as the act or process of depicting by means
 of new construction the form, features and architectural character of a structure that no
 longer exists. This type of project typically involves replicating a historic structure to a
 particular point in time—often for interpretive purposes.




Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 29
 Appendices
After the project approach has been identified, the property owner should refer to this manual
and apply the design guidelines in the initial stages of planning and design. The primary
approach of the Commission and the design review guidelines emphasizes preservation instead
of removal/replacement and the use of sustainable practices and materials where possible.
These principles are demonstrated in the use of words such as repair, retain, maintain,
compatible and replace in-kind. When planning a rehabilitation or new construction project, the
Commission encourages property owners to consider a series of steps in their planning.

One—What Is the Significance of the Property?
What is the age of the property and how has it changed over time? Does the building contribute
to the character of the historic district through its architectural design? The Commission and Staff
can assist in determining if a property is contributing or non-contributing.



 D
Two—What Is the Building’s Condition and Integrity?
A building with historic and architectural integrity will retain most of its character defining features
on its primary and secondary elevations that are visible from the street. A property’s degree of


 R
integrity will help determine the desired outcome of the project.

Three—What Is the Intent of the Project?
Some projects may only require upgrades to interiors which are not reviewed by the Commission.




 FT
Exterior changes may be limited to in-kind repair and replacement or involve entire structure
rehabilitation. Projects may also involve adding living space to a historic structure.

Four—What Is the Proposed Project Treatment Plan?


 A
An appropriate project treatment plan will be developed once the historical significance, integrity
and project intent has been determined. A project may include a variety of actions such as
maintenance of some elements, repair of deteriorated materials, replacement of deteriorated
materials, in-kind or replacement of deteriorated materials with compatible new materials, and
construction of an addition or ancillary building.

When reviewing a property owner’s proposed project treatment plan the Commission will be
guided by a series of principles as follows:
 Proposed projects should emphasize retaining, maintaining, preserving, and repairing original
 or historic features.
 If such features and elements cannot be retained, maintained, preserved, and repaired, then
 replacement in-kind is recommended. Replacement in-kind means that the new feature and
 element match the existing original, or historic material in size, detail, profile, finish, and
 texture as closely as possible. Architectural details and materials can be documented through
 drawings, photographs, or physical evidence. Such documentation will aid in defining
 appropriate rehabilitation activities.

Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 30
 Appendices
 If material replacement in-kind is not feasible or practical, the Commission may consider the
 use of appropriate alternative materials that match the original as closely as possible in
 texture, design, and overall appearance.
 Rehabilitation will be reviewed to determine the impact, compatibility, and appropriateness of
 the proposed work to the existing structures, site, streetscape, and district.
 Rehabilitation shall be compatible with the historic building or structure for which it is
 proposed. Compatible rehabilitation efforts are those that protect and retain significant
 architectural features and elements of individual buildings and the district.
 New construction for primary buildings and outbuildings shall be compatible with adjacent
 buildings along the street and blockface in massing, scale, materials, and setback.

Five—What Must be Submitted to the Commission for Review?
In addition to a completed Certificate of Appropriateness application, the Commission also


 D
requires the following for specific projects:
 New retaining walls: A sample or photo of the proposed wall material.
 New exterior materials: A sample or photo of the proposed exterior material.


 R
 AFT

Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 31
Phase 1 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Survey
Windshield-Level

Executive Summary
Project Limits: Phase 1 Survey Area (see Map 1)
Location: Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas

Submitted to: City of Fayetteville​
Submitted by: Post Oak Preservation Solutions, LLC​
Report Author: Megan Warley McDonald and Rebecca Lapham Wallisch

Final Draft Submitted: February 23, 2026​
Table Of Contents
1. Introduction​ 3
2. Summary​ 5
3. Glossary​ 6
4. Methodology​ 7
5. Phase 1 Windshield Survey - Results​ 11
6. Recommendations​ 14
 6.1. Potential Historic Districts​ 14
 6.1.1. Southeast Fayetteville’s Historic Black Community​ 14
 6.1.2. Drake Field​ 18
 6.1.3. South Fayetteville​ 20
 6.1.4. Downtown Fayetteville​ 23
 6.1.5. Native Stone Houses of 314 Nonnamaker Drive​ 25
 6.1.6. Expansion of Washington-Willow National Register Historic District​ 27
 6.1.7. Fayetteville Country Club​ 29
 6.1.8. Fayetteville Pump Station​ 31
 6.1.9. Crest Drive Residences​ 33
 6.1.10. Intensive Level Survey and Documentation of Historic Cemeteries​ 34
 6.2. Preservation Focus Areas​ 35
 6.2.1. Fayetteville’s Black Heritage​ 35
 6.2.2. Architecturally Significant Resources Associated with the U of A School of Architecture​ 36
 6.2.3. Ozark Vernacular Houses​ 38
 6.2.4. Rustic, Native Stone, and “Giraffe Rock” Houses​ 39
7. Bibliography/Relevant Resources​ 40
Appendix A. Types of Historic Designation​ 42
 A. National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)​ 42
 a. Criteria for Evaluation​ 42
 b. Areas of Significance​ 43
 c. National Register Criterion Considerations​ 43
 d. Period of Significance​ 43
 e. Seven Aspects of Integrity​ 43
 f. National Register Historic Districts​ 45
 B. National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form (MPDF)​ 45
 C. Local Historic District Designation​ 45
Appendix B. Previously Designated Historic Properties​ 47
Appendix C. Maps​ 49
Appendix D. Tables​ 54




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 2
1.​ Introduction
Post Oak Preservation Solutions LLC (Post Oak) was contracted by the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas to
complete Phase 1 of a citywide windshield survey of historic properties. The project was funded in part by a
Certified Local Government (CLG) grant, administered by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program
(AHPP) of the Division of Arkansas Heritage and the National Park Service (NPS), Department of the Interior.
This project is the first phase of a multi-year survey effort to identify and characterize Fayetteville’s historic
buildings to inform future land use planning and preservation efforts.

Map 1. Phase 1 Windshield Survey Area.




The Phase 1 survey area was established by the City of Fayetteville Planning Department and focused on
southeast Fayetteville (see Map 1), an area that has been historically underrepresented in the City’s past
historic resource survey efforts. At the direction of the City, Post Oak prioritized buildings constructed in
1970 or earlier; within the Phase 1 survey area, over 1,200 parcels included one or more buildings that met
this criteria. A handful of properties constructed after 1970 were documented due to their high potential for
architectural significance. Approximately 178 parcels in the survey area were previously surveyed, including
those already listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the Arkansas Register of Historic
Places (ARHP); these properties were photographed to provide an updated record of their current
condition. Though the survey primarily focused on properties within the Fayetteville city limits, at the



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 3
request of the City, Post Oak also conducted desktop aerial analysis of properties outside the city limits but
within the Fayetteville Planning Area (the results of this desktop aerial analysis is provided in the inventory
spreadsheet).


 FIELD SURVEY OVERVIEW

 ●​ The Phase 1 survey area includes approximately 6,200 total parcels
 ●​ A preliminary review identified 1,255 parcels with historic-age resources (i.e. resources
 constructed in 1970 or earlier) within the survey area. Post Oak conducted a desktop analysis of
 all historic-age parcels, removing parcels with historic buildings that had irreversibly lost integrity
 or had been demolished.
 ●​ A total of 1,048 resources were field-surveyed.
 ●​ Following desktop analysis and field survey, 486 properties were identified as potentially
 historically significant and included in the final inventory.
 ○​ An additional 7 properties located outside of the city limits but inside the Fayetteville
 Planning Area were identified as potentially significant through aerial analysis.

As described in the NPS National Register Bulletin 24, "Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for
Preservation Planning,” the purpose of a windshield survey is:

 …not to gain detailed information on particular structures or sites, but to get a general picture of
 the distribution of different types and styles, and of the character of different neighborhoods…One
 of the important functions of a reconnaissance is to identify the boundaries of areas that may
 become the objects of intensive survey–perhaps potential historic districts, perhaps portions of the
 community having distinctive architectural, planning, or cultural characteristics.1

Based on this NPS guidance, Post Oak’s Phase 1 survey primarily sought to identify properties and
groupings of properties that warrant further research and intensive-level survey. High-level background
information on individual properties was included in the inventory table; no in-depth historic or archival
research was conducted as part of this effort. This report summarizes broad recommendations for future
intensive level survey, including preliminary boundaries; potential historic districts would be determined
through further research and survey efforts during subsequent project phases.

Post Oak Preservation Solutions would like to acknowledge the guidance, support, and feedback provided
by Britin Bostick and Kylee Cole of the City of Fayetteville’s Long Range Planning Department as well as
Iain Montgomery of the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP).
__________________________________________________________________________________
This material was produced with assistance from the Historic Preservation Fund, administered by the
National Park Service, Department of the Interior and the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, an
agency of the Division of Arkansas Heritage. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations
expressed in this materials are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the view of the
Department of the Interior or the Division of Arkansas Heritage.



1
 “National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning,” accessed December
4, 2025, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB24-Complete_Part1t.pdf.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 4
2.​ Summary

Project Type: Fieldwork Dates:

  Historic Resource Survey (Windshield) October 19-24, 2025
 November 10-13, 2025




Project Limits: Anticipated Completion:

 Phase 1 Survey Area as established by City of Draft 1: On or before January 9, 2026
 Fayetteville Planning Department (See Map 1).
 Draft 2: On or before April 30, 2026

 Final Submission of all Deliverables: On or before
 June 22, 2026



Project Cutoff Date for Historic Resources: Personnel:

  1970 (date established by City of Fayetteville) Post Oak Preservation Solutions, LLC:

 ●​ Ellis Mumford-Russell (Founder)

 ●​ Megan Warley McDonald (Project
 Manager/Architectural Historian)

 ●​ Rebecca Lapham Wallisch (Senior
 Architectural Historian)

 ●​ Rachel Alison (Associate)

 ●​ Angela Jimenez (Architectural Historian)




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 5
3.​ Glossary

AHPP Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (see SHPO)

ARHP Arkansas Register of Historic Places

BHPC Black Heritage Preservation Commission (Local Fayetteville Organization)

CAD County Appraisal District

CLG Certified Local Government

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

GIS Global Information Systems (Mapping Data)

Historic-age For this HRSR, resources considered historic-age are those constructed in or
 before 1970

HPC Historic Preservation Commission

HRSR Historic Resources Survey Report

MPDF Multiple Property Documentation Form

NPS National Park Service

NRHP National Register of Historic Places

NRHD National Register Historic District

Property For this HRSR, a property is generally a single legal parcel that contains one or
 more historic-age resources

Resource For this HRSR, a resource is a single building, site, object, or structure located
 on/within a property in the Phase 1 survey area.

RFP Request for Proposals

ROW Right-of-way

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office (see AHPP)

U of A University of Arkansas (Fayetteville)




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 6
4.​ Methodology

Post Oak Preservation Solutions conducted a windshield-level survey of the Phase 1 survey area. As
established in the City of Fayetteville Citywide Survey–Phase 1 Request for Proposals (RFP), all resources
with buildings constructed in 1970 or earlier were evaluated, but only those with potential historic
significance were surveyed. Properties with buildings were the focus of this effort; additional historic
resource types, including structures, objects, or below-ground resources were generally not surveyed or
inventoried. Exceptions included the NRHP-listed Goff Stone Bridge (Resource 451) and eight historic age
cemeteries. The windshield survey was conducted following the standards set in National Register Bulletin
24, and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Identification. The results of the survey provide a
high-level inventory of potentially historically significant resources (buildings, districts, or cemeteries) in the
survey area, and include address and parcel number, approximate date of construction, resource type,
architectural style, notes about potential significance, and integrity. Per the RFP, and through consultation
with the City of Fayetteville and AHPP, a streamlined survey form was created and a form (with
accompanying photograph) was submitted for each resource with potential historic significance.

As a high-level windshield survey, Post Oak’s primary objective was to identify individual properties and
groupings of properties that may embody or represent significant aspects of Fayetteville’s history. Further
research and intensive-level survey will be required to formally evaluate eligibility for listing on the NRHP,
ARHP or local designation.

4.1.​ Pre-Survey Preparation

In coordination with the City, Post Oak obtained County Appraisal District (CAD) parcel data for all
properties within the Phase 1 survey area that were constructed in 1970 or earlier. In most instances, Post
Oak did not attempt to verify the build date provided by the CAD data, as it was outside the scope of the
windshield survey. However, Post Oak did conduct aerial analysis of the survey area using overlayed
historic aerial photographs to identify any historic-age (1970 or earlier) properties that were not included in
the City’s pre-filtered parcel data. Post Oak did amend/verify build dates for properties where historic aerial
imagery revealed that the build date was incorrect, or the appearance of the building suggested a different
construction date. Where actual build dates were available from an existing AHPP form or other source,
these were included and indicated as “actual” on the survey forms. Any future intensive level surveys
should verify build dates through the use of Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, digitized newspapers, historic
aerial imagery, deed records, and other sources of available documentation.

Several properties (18 individual properties and 3 districts) in the Phase 1 survey area were previously listed
on either the National Register of Historic Places or the Arkansas Register of Historic Places (see Table 1,
Appendix B). Fayetteville has two local historic designations: the White Hangar at Drake Field (Resource
483) and the Oak Grove Historic District (outside the Phase 1 survey area). Post Oak reviewed the
nominations to extract basic information (date of construction, associated architect, architectural style)
which was entered into the inventory spreadsheet. These properties were photographed during field
survey and included in the overall inventory of historic resources. In addition to National Register and



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 7
Arkansas Register documentation, all previous survey documentation for properties within the Phase 1
survey area was obtained from AHPP, reviewed, and relevant data was added to the inventory. Post Oak
also reviewed a collection of historic photographs provided by the City Planning department. Initially taken
by the Code Department in the 1960s and 1970s, the photographs provided helpful integrity information for
the properties documented in the Phase 1 survey area. Relevant information obtained by Post Oak during
the course of developing the 2025 Historic Context Statement “The Historic Black Community of Southeast
Fayetteville,” was also included in the inventory for properties with known historic associations.

After all pre-existing documentation was entered into the inventory, Post Oak Architectural Historians, all of
whom exceed the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications for Architectural History and/or
History, conducted a preliminary review of each parcel with historic-age resources. Post Oak used Google
Streetview and historic aerial images to preliminarily identify resource type, architectural style, potentially
significant outbuildings, integrity, and potential eligibility. Per the City of Fayetteville RFP, Post Oak also
identified properties within the initial inventory that had been demolished, substantially altered, or were
ubiquitous and non-descript resource types with a low probability for historic significance and removed
them from the inventory. During pre-survey planning, Post Oak also included any outstanding questions
about individual properties to be addressed during field survey and noted these in the preliminary
inventory. Mapping was undertaken simultaneously during the inventory process. Post Oak created a
single GIS map point for each property with a building (or buildings) constructed in or before 1970, color
coded by potentially significant or not significant. These points were then mapped on survey field maps,
which outlined potentially significant individual properties and potentially significant clusters of historic
buildings to be examined in the field as potential historic districts.

Lastly, as agreed upon by Post Oak, the City, and AHPP, Post Oak conducted an aerial analysis of parcels
outside of the city limits but within the Fayetteville Planning Area. These parcels were not field surveyed or
photographed unless they appeared to be exceptionally significant. Ultimately, six parcels outside the city
limits but within the Fayetteville Planning Area were slated for field survey (see inventory spreadsheet).

4.2.​ Field Survey

Post Oak conducted the field survey in two phases: the first from October 19-23rd and the second from
November 10-13th, 2025. Photographs were taken of the primary facade of the most prominent historic-age
building on each identified property unless access was limited from the public right-of-way (ROW).
Additionally, any significant information about integrity was recorded on field notes. If landscaping, fences,
safety concerns, or other obstructions prevented clear photographs, Google Maps and Streetview were
used to supplement the images in order to evaluate the resource. In some cases, a property was not visible
from the ROW nor were photographs available online. It was discovered in the field that several inventoried
buildings had been recently demolished, which was not yet reflected in either the parcel data or Google
Streetview, and the property was subsequently removed from the inventory.

Only potentially historically significant outbuildings were noted in the inventory and primarily included
historic-age garages, ancillary dwellings, and sheds, but they were not individually photographed.
Non-historic-age outbuildings were not documented, including prefabricated sheds and carports. Any
future intensive-level historic resources surveys should include a closer evaluation of potentially historically
significant outbuildings.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 8
Previously designated resources within the Phase 1 survey area were also photographed. As agreed upon
with the City, only representative photos of the Mount Sequoyah NRHD were taken; the district consists of
the Methodist Assembly property that was very recently listed (and therefore documented) in 2022. Each
building within the Washington-Willow NRHD was photographed to document integrity in the event that the
district is updated in the future.

4.3.​ Analysis & Report

Upon completion of the field survey, Post Oak Architectural Historians analyzed the survey data and
updated the inventory and GIS map points. Properties that were demolished or significantly altered were
removed from the final inventory. In addition, per the City of Fayetteville RFP, properties that were not
determined to be likely individually eligible or were not within the boundary of a potential historic district
were also removed from the inventory. The resulting data was then used to refine the boundaries for
potential new or expanded districts recommended for future intensive level survey, and to create an
inventory of potentially individually eligible properties. An inventory table, individual survey forms for each
property with potential historic significance, and this Executive Summary were prepared for the City’s future
planning and preservation efforts.

Upon completion of the final survey inventory, Post Oak outlined recommendations for potential new and
expanded historic districts (pending future survey) and recommendations for general preservation focus
areas (see Section 6.2). The first draft of the historic resources survey report and inventory was shared with
the City of Fayetteville Long Range Planning Department and the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program,
and feedback was incorporated into the final draft.

4.4.​ Evaluation of Potential Significance and Preservation Priority

Preservation Planning Priority 1: “High”
In addition to the criteria, below, a “High” preservation planning priority was assigned to properties that
represent a rare resource type, are associated with a community that is underrepresented on the NRHP, or
are facing major development pressure. In most cases, resources that are already listed on the NRHP
were not assigned a “High” preservation planning priority unless facing development pressure or other
threats.

Criteria:
 ●​ Constructed or moved prior to 1970 OR constructed after 1970 and appears to be exceptionally
 significant architecturally or historically; AND,
 ●​ Contribute significantly to local history or broader historical patterns; OR,
 ●​ Had an association with longstanding residents of the area that likely made significant
 contributions to the community; OR,
 ●​ Are architecturally distinct or are a rare example of a specific building form, architectural style, or
 plan-type; OR,
 ●​ Are a good representative example of a common local building form, architectural style, or
 plan-type; AND,
 ●​ Retain good to excellent historic integrity, including historic materials, character-defining features,
 and physical context of the resource and/or landscape.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 9
Preservation Planning Priority 2: “Moderate”
In addition to the criteria, below, a “Medium” preservation planning priority was assigned to properties that
represent a common but significant historic building type that is represented on the NRHP and are not
facing major development pressure. In most cases, resources that are already listed on the NRHP were
assigned a “Medium” preservation planning priority.

Criteria:
 ●​ Constructed or moved prior to 1970; AND,
 ●​ Contribute significantly to local history or broader historical patterns; OR,
 ●​ Had an association with longstanding residents of the area that likely made significant
 contributions to the community; OR,
 ●​ Are architecturally distinct or are a rare example of a specific building form, architectural style, or
 plan-type; OR,
 ●​ Are a good representative example of a common local building form, architectural style, or
 plan-type; AND,
 ●​ Retain only fair historic integrity due to moderate alterations or deterioration of the resource and/or
 landscape.

Preservation Planning Priority 3 “Low”:

Criteria:
 ●​ Constructed or moved prior to 1970; AND,
 ●​ Retains fair historic integrity and is in stable condition; AND,
 ●​ Requires more research to determine potential significance and eligibility, AND,
 ●​ Does not appear to be facing imminent development pressures.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 10
5.​ Phase 1 Windshield Survey - Results

Of the approximately 1,250 parcels with historic-age (1970 or earlier) resources within the Phase 1 boundary
of Fayetteville’s historic resources windshield survey, Post Oak staff surveyed and field verified 1,048
parcels. Following the methodology outlined above in Section 4, Post Oak determined that 486 properties
contained one or more historic-age resources with potential historic or architectural significance.

5.1.​ Historic Properties by Age

As outlined below in Table 1, the highest concentration of properties (39 percent) with potential historic
significance date to the period between 1921 and 1945, followed by those constructed in the post-war era
(1946-1970 - 25 percent), and those dating to the turn of the twentieth century (1900-1920 - 22 percent).

The Phase 1 windshield survey revealed 47 properties within the study area dating to the nineteenth
century per CAD data, although additional research is needed to verify these construction dates. Of these,
there are seven cemeteries with burials dating to the nineteenth century: Resources 233, 236, 237, 451,
456, 434, and 457. Additional nineteenth century resources include one bridge (Resource 451), the former
Henderson School (currently a residence - Resource 67), one masonry pump station (Resource 458), the St.
James UMC Church (Resource 211), and 33 single family dwellings. Out of the 33 single family dwellings, 15
are located within the NRHP-listed Washington-Willow Historic District (Map 2). Post Oak noted that several
of the remaining properties are heavily altered (Resource 240), while others were set back from the public
ROW and difficult to document (Resources 417, 466). Several nineteenth century resources were
dramatically modified over time (Resource 480), although some appear to retain historic integrity and may
be significant due to their age, style, or historic association (for example, Resources 196, 428, 465).


 Table 2: Phase 1 Potentially Significant Properties by Approximate Year Built

 Year Built * # of Surveyed Properties Percent of Total

 19th Century 47 10%

 1900-1920 108 22%

 1921-1945 192 40%

 1946-1970 119 24%

 Post-1970 20 4%

 Total 486 100%

 *Most year built dates were sourced from Washington County, AR CAD Data, although other sources were utilized to
 verify year built dates for properties whose resources appeared mis-labeled by age in CAD.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 11
5.2.​ Historic Properties by Property Type

The predominant resource type of inventoried properties within the Phase 1 windshield survey boundary
were single family homes, which constituted 86 percent of the total. Only a handful (25 or fewer) each of
commercial, religious, cemetery, multi-family, government/military, social, education-related, and
infrastructure related property types were identified.

Some of the inventoried single family dwellings are on large-lot suburban, rural, or agricultural properties.
Due to the high-level scope of this windshield survey, small-scale residential farms and ranches were not
enumerated as agricultural properties. Some single family dwellings may have historical significance
associated with early settlement, agricultural development, or other historic themes, requiring additional
research. Per NPS Bulletin 30, Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes, a
small-scale family farm or ranch would, in most cases, need to retain its historic residence to retain
sufficient integrity for NRHP-listing.2 As a result, documentation of historic residences on agricultural
properties is sufficient for identifying properties with potential historic significance at the windshield level.
Furthermore, agricultural outbuildings on properties that lack a historic residence, other clusters of
buildings, or small scale elements are unlikely to be individually eligible for the NRHP. As a result, individual
outbuildings were also not enumerated as part of this effort. When located on properties with associated
residences, outbuildings were noted during field survey and briefly listed in the final inventory.


 Table 3: Phase 1 Potentially Significant Properties by Type

 Property Type # of Surveyed Properties Percent of Total

 Single Family Residential* 420 86%

 Multi-Family Residential 8 2%

 Education Related 5 1%

 Religious 10 2%

 Commercial 24 5%

 Funerary/Cemetery 8 2%

 Government/Aviation/Military 9 2%

 Social 2 <1%

 Bridge/Dam/Infrastructure 2 <1%

 Total 486 100%

 *Properties categorized as single family residential include those located on large agricultural lots with a main
 residence. Located in both suburban and semi-rural areas. They also include outbuildings associated with single
 family residential properties that are located on adjacent parcels.


2
 “National Park Service Bulletin 30: Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes,” accessed
December 4, 2025,” accessed December 10, 2025,
https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB30-Complete.pdf.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 12
5.3.​ Historic Properties by Form and Style

Of the 486 properties within the Phase 1 survey boundary there were a variety of building forms, material
types, and architectural styles present. Some resources exhibited one or more styles, forms, or types. For
example, there were several homes featuring giraffe rock or native stone that also exhibited elements
associated with the Tudor Revival style (including Resources 454, 465, and 472). However, due to the
high-level scope of this windshield-level survey, properties were enumerated by their style or form in only
one category. Throughout the Phase 1 survey boundary, there was a high concentration of properties that
exhibited giraffe rock or native stone exteriors (at least 50 properties, more than 10 percent total), which
are recommended for further study (see Section 6.2.4). Another distinctive property type encountered in
the survey were Ozark Vernacular houses, which are simple house forms dating to the late 19th and early
20th centuries. Common Ozark Vernacular house types include the single pen, double pen, gable front,
and Gabled Ell or “Bent House.”

 Table 4: Phase 1 Potentially Significant Properties by Style/Form

 Architectural Style/Form # of % of Total Architectural Style/Form # of % of
 Surveyed Surveyed Total
 Properties* Properties*

 Art Deco/ 2 <1% Ranch 39 8%
 Streamline Moderne

 Bungalow 97 20% Modern Movement (Prairie, 43 9%
 Wrightian, Shed, Mid-century
 Modern, etc.)

 Colonial Revival (Dutch, 18 4% Minimal Traditional 34 7%
 Georgian, etc.)

 Craftsman 3 <1% Neoclassical Revival 6 1%

 Double Pen 7 1% Single Pen 3 1%

 Gable Front 45 9% Split Level 3 1%

 Gabled Ell/"Bent House" 23 5% Side Gable 25 5%

 Giraffe Rock/Rustic 51 10% Site (Cemetery) 8 2%

 Tudor/Gothic Revival 13 3% Victorian (Folk, Queen Anne, 47 10%
 Free Classic, etc.)

 One-part Commercial 8 2% No style/form identified/ 9 2%
 Block Other

 Quonset Hut 2 <1% TOTAL 486 100%

 *Some properties may fall into one or more categories in this table. Due to the high-level nature of this effort,
 properties were only categorized once based on their most easily recognizable style or form.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 13
6.​ Recommendations
6.1.​ Potential Historic Districts

Several concentrations of historic resources within the Phase 1 survey area warrant further, intensive-level
surveys due to their concentration of potentially significant resources. Recommendations are outlined in
four categories: Intensive Level Survey, National Register of Historic Places, Local Designation, and
Interpretation. In-depth research as part of future surveys would be key to determining any potential
districts boundaries and areas of significance.


 PHASE 1 SURVEY: POTENTIAL HISTORIC DISTRICTS

 ●​ Potential Historic Districts
 ○​ Southeast Fayetteville’s Historic Black Community
 ○​ Drake Field
 ○​ South Fayetteville
 ○​ Fayetteville Downtown Square Historic District
 ○​ Stone Houses of Nonnamaker Drive
 ○​ Expansion of the Washington-Willow NR-Listed Historic District
 ○​ Fayetteville Country Club
 ○​ Fayetteville Pump Station
 ○​ Crest Drive
 ●​ Intensive Level Survey and Documentation of Historic Cemeteries


6.1.1.​ Southeast Fayetteville’s Historic Black Community

Recommendations

Survey
 ●​ An intensive-level survey would be an essential component of any efforts toward establishing an
 NHRP-listed historic district or a local historic district (see Map 2, Appendix C).
 ●​ While many resources associated with Fayetteville’s Black Heritage are concentrated in Southeast
 Fayetteville and were documented in Phase 1, there are likely other significant Black resources
 elsewhere in the city that may be encountered in future phases of survey. For example, Oaks
 Cemetery, the primary burial ground for Black residents for decades, is well outside of the
 neighborhood (about a mile and a half southwest and outside of the Phase 1 survey area). In
 addition, Black residents worked in local businesses and institutions throughout the city, and their
 representation in designation and interpretive efforts is essential. Current representation does not
 reflect the breadth of their contributions.

National Register of Historic Places
 ●​ Based on the results of this survey, as well as the in-depth research compiled in Post Oak’s 2025
 Historic Context Statement, there may be potential for a small NRHD related to Southeast


 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 14
 Fayetteville’s Black community. The district would be eligible under Criterion A: Ethnic Heritage:
 Black, and potentially Criterion A: Community Planning and Development, for the role of de-facto
 residential segregation in creating the Black residential enclave. Upon listing, income-producing
 properties within the district would be eligible for Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credits (though
 most properties in the district are owner-occupied residential). Listing may also open other funding
 opportunities for preservation and rehabilitation through state, federal, or non-profit grant
 programs.
 ●​ Depending on the results of further citywide survey efforts, a city-wide Multiple Property
 Documentation Form (MPDF) might aid in the nomination to the NRHP of resources related to
 Fayetteville’s Black Heritage. See Appendix A for a description of MPDFs. The MPDF could build
 upon the historic context developed by Post Oak in 2025 and facilitate the nomination of
 geographically disparate resources throughout Fayetteville. However, if few additional resources
 related to Black Heritage are found in other areas, individual NRHP and/or local designations or a
 small Southeast Fayetteville Historic District may be more appropriate.
 ●​ St. James United Methodist Church (Resource 211) is likely individually eligible under Criterion A,
 Social History and Criterion A, Ethnic Heritage: Black, due to its significant and central role in
 Fayetteville’s Black community. The church was a center for local community organizing and
 served as a meeting place amidst Civil Rights era efforts to desegregate public facilities. It was also
 the site of the city’s first Head Start program, a President Johnson-era “Great Society” initiative
 designed to address educational disparities through early intervention. St. James is a rare, extant,
 historic Black institution in Fayetteville; St. James Baptist Church was lost to fire in 1944, the Lincoln
 School was demolished c. 1965, and the Henderson School was irrevocably altered for use as a
 residence in the 1940s. Listing on the NRHD would not only honor and recognize the history of St.
 James United Methodist Church and its prominent role in Fayetteville’s Black community, but might
 also enhance its eligibility for grant or other funding mechanisms to ensure its long-term
 preservation.3

Local Designation
 ●​ Citizen efforts are underway to create a local historic district to protect resources associated with
 Southeast Fayetteville’s historic Black community. Many of the community’s historic resources have
 been lost to demolition or new infill, and development pressure, deterioration, and lack of funding
 and resources for preservation and maintenance threaten the remaining resources. If successfully
 designated, a local historic district would help safeguard Fayetteville’s Black Heritage through
 legally-enforceable local review by the City’s Historic District Commission of proposed alterations
 and demolitions in the community.

Interpretation
 ●​ The Black Heritage Preservation Commission (BHPC) has an active historical marker program that
 could be leveraged to identify and recognize important Black spaces in Southeast Fayetteville.



3
 St. James United Methodist Church may be eligible for a number of brick and mortar grants, including those funded
by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP):
https://www.arkansasheritage.com/arkansas-preservation/about/available-grants; the National Fund for Sacred Places:
https://www.fundforsacredplaces.org/; or the African American Cultural Heritage Action Fund of the National Trust for
Historic Preservation:, https://savingplaces.org/african-american-cultural-heritage. Though National Register listing is
not necessarily required for these grants, it may help demonstrate the significance of the Church.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 15
 ●​ In addition to traditional historical markers and walking tours, tremendous potential exists for
 thoughtful and creative interpretation of the neighborhood’s history, including significant resources
 that have been lost (including the Lincoln School, Sherman’s Tavern, St. James Baptist Church, the
 Black Masonic Lodge, demolished residences, etc), and the stories of prominent and influential
 residents. Buddy Hayes Park may be an ideal location for historic interpretation of the broader
 neighborhood.




Left: Etched panel depicting lost structures at the Washington-on-the-Brazos State Historic Site in Texas; Right:
“Looking Glass” panel depicting a historic photograph of a demolished building superimposed on the lot where it
once stood in Elyria, Ohio.4




Left: Smokey Hollow commemoration in Tallahassee, Florida, depicting the building outlines of lost shotgun
houses. Right: A “ghost structure” at the Mann-Simon Historic Site in Columbia, South Carolina; 5



4
  “A Window on the Past,” Texas Parks and Wildlife Archive, accessed December 4, 2025,
https://tpwmagazine.com/archive/2019/jan/scout5_parknews/; Owen MacMillan, “Historical Looking Glass Unveiled in
Ely Square,” The Chronicle-Telegram, accessed December 4, 2025,
https://chroniclet.com/news/440961/historical-looking-glass-unveiled-in-ely-square/.
5
  “Mann-Simons Site,” Historic Columbia, accessed December 4, 2025,
https://www.historiccolumbia.org/tours/house-tours/mann-simons-site; “Smokey Hollow Commemoration,” Architect
Magazine, accessed December 4, 2025,
https://www.architectmagazine.com/project-gallery/smokey-hollow-commemoration/.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 16
●​ Interpretation of the Henderson School (Resource 67). Though the former Henderson School is
 one of the most significant extant resources associated with Fayetteville’s Black Heritage, it was
 renovated for use as a private residence in the 1940s and no longer retains integrity to convey its
 significance as a school. It is therefore not likely eligible for listing on the NRHD under Criterion A:
 Education or Ethnic Heritage: Black. However, in cooperation with the current property owner, it
 may be possible to recognize and educate the public about the significance of the property in the
 form of a historic marker, interpretive panel, or other preservation or interpretation tools. A historic
 marker is currently under consideration by the Black Heritage Preservation Commission (BHPC),
 which would be an effective first step at recognizing the historic significance of the property. The
 city’s historical marker program is an excellent tool for highlighting the history of significant places
 such as the Henderson School, though is entirely dependent upon continued funding by the City
 or grant funding. At the time of this report, only one known former student of the Henderson
 School is still living: Jessie Carr Bryant.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 17
6.1.2.​ Drake Field




Left: The exterior of the White Hangar, currently the home of the Arkansas Air and Military Museum.
Right: Interior of the White Hangar.

Drake Field is a historic airport south of downtown Fayetteville that includes several potentially significant
historic buildings: the White Hangar (Resource 483, WA0792), the Federal Aviation Administration Building
(Resource 485, WA1809), and the Drake Field Terminal Building (Resource 484, WA1808). The buildings are
potentially eligible for listing on the National Register as a district. The White Hangar, constructed in 1941, is
listed on the Arkansas Register of Historic Places and is one of two locally designated districts in
Fayetteville. Constructed during the wartime shortage of building materials, the construction team utilized
local timber from the surrounding Boston Mountains, as well as junk metal for the nails and doors.6 Both the
Terminal Building and FAA Building are midcentury modern buildings designed by E. Keith McPheeters, a
member of the University of Arkansas College of Architecture faculty.

Recommendations

Survey
 ●​ The historic age buildings at Drake Field have all previously been surveyed and an intensive level
 survey is therefore not necessary at this time.

National Register of Historic Places
 ●​ Fire Station No. 3 at Drake Field (Resource 482) is individually listed on the National Register.
 ●​ The White Hangar is listed on the ARHP, but not the NRHD. It may be eligible as part of a small
 Drake Field Historic District or individually.
 ●​ There is potential for a small Drake Field Historic District that includes the White Hangar, FAA
 Building, and Drake Field Terminal Building. The potential district would likely be eligible under
 Criterion C for Architecture and Engineering, and additional research may indicate other areas of
 significance. National Register listing may provide opportunities for grant or other funding
 mechanisms to ensure the long-term preservation of these significant buildings. See Map 5,
 Appendix C for an approximate potential historic district boundary.

Local Designation
 ●​ The White Hangar is currently the only locally designated district in Fayetteville. If the FAA Building,
 the Drake Field Terminal Building, or Fire Station No. 3 are at risk of loss due to future airport
 expansion or local development, local designation would provide a layer of protection and review
 for these buildings.

6
 “Fayetteville Municipal Airport Hangar ‘White Hangar,’” Arkansas Heritage, accessed December 4, 2025,
https://www.arkansasheritage.com/arkansas-register/fayetteville-municipal-airport-hangar-white-hangar.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 18
Interpretation
 ●​ The White Hangar currently houses the Arkansas Air and Military Museum, which includes some
 interpretation about the construction of the hangar itself.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 19
6.1.3.​ South Fayetteville

A number of historic-age and potentially significant resources were surveyed in a residential area
historically known as “South Fayetteville.” (see Map 2, Appendix C). The community is located in a roughly
triangular area south of E. Huntsville Road and Nelson Hackett Boulevard and north of E. 7th Street. South
Fayetteville largely consists of modest residential properties constructed during the 20th century. The
community was primarily occupied by middle and working class residents, in contrast to the
Washington-Willow area, which was occupied by middle and upper-class residents. The neighborhood is
characterized by a diversity of modest house styles and types, which includes Ozark Vernacular building
forms (single pen, double pen, gable front, side gable, gabled ell or “bent house”), early 20th century
bungalows, Depression-era and midcentury Giraffe Rock homes, Folk Victorian houses, and more.

Though primarily occupied by White residents, South Fayetteville also includes an area historically referred
to as “the Valley,” by Black residents. The Valley was a residential area where both White and Black
residents lived during the mid- to late- 20th century. Prominent Black residents included popular local
musician, Buddy Hayes (Resource 377). In addition, the historically Black Combs Street Church of Christ
(Resource 352) is located in the Valley.

Due to the community’s working class origins, homes in South Fayetteville are typically modest in size and
historically provided affordable housing near downtown. In recent years, however, South Fayetteville has
experienced significant new development involving the demolition of historic-age resources and
construction of new developments that are often incompatible with the scale and character of the
neighborhood. Insensitive alterations to historic buildings has led to further loss of historic character.

Recommendations

Survey
 ●​ Intensive level survey with accompanying research is essential to future preservation planning
 efforts in South Fayetteville. Intensive level survey would also identify properties that may be
 individually eligible or could be listed under an MPDF. See Map 2, Appendix C for recommended
 survey area.

National Register of Historic Places
 ●​ According to the 2023 Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan and Post Oak
 conversations with former HDC members, AHPP staff opined in 2016 that a South Fayetteville
 historic district was not likely to be successful (though no survey had been conducted). Based on
 Phase 1 survey efforts, Post Oak believes that there could be potential for a small district in South
 Fayetteville, though further research is required to determine the criteria under which it would be
 eligible and appropriate boundaries. The potential district could be eligible under Criterion C for
 Architecture due to the presence of several significant Ozark Vernacular homes and “Giraffe Rock”
 houses, however these resources are dispersed throughout the neighborhood. Further research
 into the community’s history may indicate that a stronger argument under Criterion A may be
 possible, perhaps under Criterion A: Social History (Labor) for associations with the working class
 residents of the area. Potential district boundaries would have to be carefully considered to ensure
 that over 50% of the buildings in the proposed district would contribute (i.e. be of historic age and
 retain integrity). Due to the amount of new infill and potential integrity issues in the area, the district
 would not likely encapsulate the full historic boundaries of the South Fayetteville community. In



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 20
 addition, an inclusive definition of integrity would be essential to the successful listing of a South
 Fayetteville Historic District, in which alterations made during the period of significance (such as
 additions and enclosed porches) were understood in the context of a working class community
 that adapted their homes as their families grew or their financial circumstances improved.
 ●​ Though a South Fayetteville National Register district could be possible, a city-wide MPDF or
 MPDFs related to Ozark Vernacular Houses or Giraffe Rock Houses may be a more appropriate
 and successful strategy to nominating properties in South Fayetteville (see Sections 6.2.3 and
 6.2.4).

Local Designation
 ●​ To slow the rapid loss of historic buildings and protect the historic character of South Fayetteville,
 the City might consider local designation and accompanying design guidelines. Local designation,
 which carries enforceable protections for historic buildings, would likely be more beneficial to the
 South Fayetteville neighborhood than National Register designation, which does not come with
 any protections.




785 S. Washington pictured in 2014 (left) and 2025 (right). The new development was constructed
between 2022-2023.




321 S. Washington is an example of an insensitive alteration that has erased the historic character of an
early 20th century South Fayetteville home. Local designation would aid in the preservation of the
neighborhood’s historic character through the careful review of new additions and alterations.

Interpretation
 ●​ Further research is required to determine potential interpretive efforts regarding the broader
 history and significance of South Fayetteville’s working class community.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 21
6.1.4.​ Downtown Fayetteville




Left: National Guard Armory (Resource 224) Right: Southwestern Electric Power Company (SWEPCO)
building (Resource 116). Both buildings are on the east side of N. College Avenue, on the edge of
downtown Fayetteville.

The east side of N. College Avenue was included in the Phase 1 survey, which is the eastern edge of
Fayetteville’s historic downtown core. Several downtown buildings in the survey area are already listed on
the NRHD, including the Washington County Courthouse (Resource 218), Washington County Jail (Resource
229), and the Lynn Shelton American Legion (Resource 227). Several additional buildings along N. College
Avenue are also likely eligible, either individually or as part of a potential Downtown Fayetteville Historic
District. Further intensive-level survey would be necessary to determine the boundaries and areas of
significance for a potential NRHP district, which is outside the scope of the Phase 1 survey area. If formally
listed on the NRHP, income producing properties within the historic district would be eligible for federal
historic rehabilitation tax credits and all properties may be eligible for other state, federal, and non-profit
grant programs.

Recommendations

Survey
 ●​ An intensive level survey of Fayetteville’s historic downtown core, to include the east side of N.
 College Avenue, which was documented in the Phase 1 survey. See Map 2, Appendix C for
 recommended survey area.

National Register of Historic Places
 ●​ There is high potential for a successful Downtown Fayetteville Historic District, which would likely
 be eligible under several National Register criteria, including Criterion A for Commerce, Community
 Planning and Development, and/or Government. Though several downtown properties are already
 individually listed, a district would capture buildings that may not be individually eligible but
 contribute to the broader significance of Fayetteville’s downtown core. Due to the high number of
 income-producing properties in downtown Fayetteville, a NRHD would render many properties
 eligible for federal historic rehabilitation tax credits.

Local Designation
 ●​ Local designation of downtown Fayetteville may aid in the prevention of insensitive alterations to
 historic buildings.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 22
Interpretation
 ●​ Though outside the Phase 1 survey area, a handful of historic markers were noted downtown.
 There is likely abundant opportunity for interpretation of local businesses and the evolution of
 downtown Fayetteville.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 23
6.1.5.​ Native Stone Houses of 314 Nonnamaker Drive


 Native Stone Houses of 314 Nonnamaker Drive




The parcel at 314 Nonnamaker Drive (Resource 454) contains a unique collection of twelve residences with
native stone or giraffe rock exteriors, all located on a single parcel (Parcel # 765-15010-000). The houses
range in construction date from 1901 to 1961, although a majority date to ca. 1926 (per CAD data). The
majority are front gable bungalows, some with modest Craftsman and Tudor Revival influences. The
neighborhood also includes a rare gambrel roof type not commonly seen in Fayetteville, although this
residence is the newest (1960s) according to CAD data. Overall the residences are a cohesive collection of
giraffe rock bungalows and an investigation of their development on a single parcel is warranted.

Recommendations

Survey
 ●​ Intensive level survey of this parcel to more closely document each of the rock houses and any
 significant outbuildings. See Map 4, Appendix C for recommended survey area.

National Register of Historic Places
 ●​ Further research regarding the development of this parcel would determine the neighborhood’s
 eligibility as a NRHD and any associated areas of significance. The neighborhood may be eligible
 under Criterion C: Architecture as a distinctive grouping of Giraffe Rock houses, and may also be
 eligible under additional criteria pending further research.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 24
Local Designation
 ●​ The buildings do not appear to be facing imminent development pressure, though some of the
 houses show signs of deferred maintenance. Local designation does not appear to be a major
 priority at this time.

Interpretation
 ●​ Further research is required to determine potential interpretive efforts.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 25
6.1.6.​ Expansion of Washington-Willow National Register Historic District




Left: Resource 52 is within the existing Washington-Willow Historic District. Right: Resource 196 is just
outside the boundaries of the Washington-Willow District, and would very likely contribute if the district
boundary were expanded.

The Washington-Willow Historic District is a residential neighborhood that was originally listed on the NRHP
in 1980 and amended to expand the boundary and period of significance in 1995. The nomination
amendment extended the period of significance to 1945, meaning that most buildings constructed after
1945 were identified as “non-contributing.” In the 30 years since the amendment, several buildings within
the district have since surpassed 50 years of age and would likely contribute to the district if it were
updated. In addition, a number of properties adjacent to the district were excluded from it due to their age
or integrity at the time of listing. If the district was amended, additional nearby properties in the
neighborhood could likely be added.

Recommendations

Survey
 ●​ Intensive level survey of areas outside the existing Washington-Willow Historic District, as well as
 properties that were initially identified as non-contributing, may indicate properties that were left
 out of the original boundaries due to age or integrity, and may now contribute to an amended
 district. Note: Only the southern half of the Washington-Willow NRHD was included in the Phase
 1 survey. Later phases of survey may determine additional adjacent areas that may warrant
 inclusion in an amended district.

National Register of Historic Places
 ●​ Results of intensive level survey surrounding the existing Washington-Willow NRHD would likely
 yield potential for a boundary and period of significance amendment. (See Map 2, Appendix C for
 proposed intensive level survey in Phase 1 survey area).

Local Designation
 ●​ The Washington-Willow Historic District appears to be facing moderate development pressure.
 Post Oak noted the demolition of several historic resources as well as insensitive alterations. If
 development pressure leads to continued loss of historic properties, the City might consider local



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 26
 designation to preserve the neighborhood’s historic fabric. However, past petition efforts to create
 a local Washington-Willow Historic District have been unsuccessful due to a lack of property owner
 support. If pursued in the future, a smaller boundary focused on the highest number of significant
 resources, the highest number of resources with integrity, or the area most at risk to development
 pressures, might prove more successful than adoption of the full NRHD boundary.

Interpretation
 ●​ The Washington-Willow Historic District is well researched and documented, and significant
 opportunities exist for interpretation in the form of interpretive signage, walking tours, etc.
 Interpretation could focus on individual homes, significant works of architecture, and Fayetteville’s
 early history, among other topics.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 27
6.1.7.​ Fayetteville Country Club




The Fayetteville Country Club (Resource 467) is reportedly one of the oldest golf courses in the region and
the property includes the original 1927 clubhouse and golf course. The course itself was designed by
prominent golf course architect Perry Maxwell, though further research is required into the course's
integrity. Additional research would also be required to understand the property's evolution over time, and
there are numerous additional buildings and structures on the property that were not accessible at the time
of survey that could contribute to or detract from the property’s significance. The residential neighborhood
immediately north of the golf course may be potentially eligible in the future, but most houses were
constructed after 1970 and were therefore outside the scope of the current Phase 1 survey. One house was
documented despite its age due to potential architectural significance: The Nelms Residence (Resource
467) was designed by E. Fay Jones and constructed in 1987.




Left: 1927 Fayetteville Country Club clubhouse. Right: Nelms Residence designed by E. Fay Jones.


 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 28
Recommendations

Survey
 ●​ Intensive level survey of the Country Club and golf course would determine if any additional
 historic age buildings are extant and provide an assessment of the integrity of the buildings and
 golf course.
 ●​ Intensive level survey of the associated neighborhood north of the golf course may yield additional
 architect designed properties in addition to the Fay Jones designed Nelms residence.

National Register of Historic Places
 ●​ Pending further research and integrity assessments, the Fayetteville Country Club could potentially
 be eligible under several National Register criteria. The property may be eligible under Criterion A:
 Entertainment and Recreation. Depending on integrity, the clubhouse may be eligible under
 Criterion C: Architecture, and the golf course may be eligible under Criterion C for Landscape
 Architecture.
 ●​ Further survey of the c. 1970s neighborhood may identify architecturally significant resources and
 potential for a district.

Local Designation
 ●​ Neither the Fayetteville Country Club nor the associated neighborhood appear to be facing major
 development pressure and local designation is not likely a priority at this time.

Interpretation
 ●​ Further research is required to determine potential interpretive efforts, though research would
 likely yield interpretive opportunities related to the history of golf in Fayetteville and Arkansas, as
 well as golf course designer Perry Maxwell.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 29
6.1.8.​ Fayetteville Pump Station




Left: the Pump Station House Right: the caretaker’s cottage. The West Fork White River and the
remains of the ca. 1889 dam are behind the buildings.

The Pump Station property (Resource 458) includes a c. 1889 stone dam (not surveyed), the Pump Station
house, and a caretaker’s cottage, located along the banks of the West Fork White River. An informational
sign on the property indicates that the pump station and cottage were constructed ca. 1925, though further
research is required to confirm these dates. Though not surveyed, the remains of a ca. 1889 dam are also
on site. Formed by the dam, the West Fork reservoir was Fayetteville’s first municipal source of drinking
water. The buildings are in rapidly deteriorating condition, as they are vacant and have not been effectively
sealed from the elements. To protect the buildings from further decay, Post Oak recommends that the City
of Fayetteville (the owner of the property), consider “mothballing”7 the buildings until a future use and
funding can be secured for their full preservation.

Recommendations

Survey/Conditions Assessment
 ●​ An intensive level survey of the Pump Station property is necessary to determine any additional
 extant structures associated with the provision of municipal water. Performed in tandem or as a
 separate undertaking, a conditions assessment would determine necessary stabilization measures
 and current state of the buildings.

National Register of Historic Places
 ●​ The Pump Station was identified as likely eligible by AHPP staff in 2010. It would likely be eligible
 under Criterion A for Community Planning and Development, pending further research. National
 Register listing may provide opportunities for grant or other funding mechanisms to ensure the
 property’s long-term preservation.

Local Designation
 ●​ The Pump Station property is owned by the City of Fayetteville.




7
 Sharon C. Park, “Preservation Brief 31: Mothballing Historic Buildings,” accessed December 4, 2025,
https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/upload/preservation-brief-31-mothballing-buildings.pdf.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 30
Interpretation
 ●​ A small informational sign is currently on site, but a much greater opportunity for interpretation
 exists related to Fayetteville’s early municipal development as well as the West Fork White River,
 which is an important natural resource. Lastly, Frank Pierce, the first early European American
 explorer to the Fayetteville area arrived at the West Fork in 1819. Though the exact location is
 unknown, the Pump Station property may be an ideal location for interpretation regarding
 Fayetteville’s early exploration.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 31
6.1.9.​ Crest Drive Residences




Left: 608 S. Crest Drive (Resource 17), Right: 609 S. Crest Drive (Resource 16)

Post Oak documented a grouping of potentially architecturally significant houses constructed between c.
1960-1975 along Crest Drive (Resources 4, 7, 11, 16, 17, 20, 21, 26, 30, 38, 39). The houses are relatively large
and situated on spacious lots with designed landscape elements. A variety of styles are present, including
ranches and revival styles. Further research is required to determine if any of the houses were architect
designed, were part of a cohesive planned neighborhood, or whether the neighborhood has other
potential historic associations with mid-century residential development in Fayetteville.

Recommendations

Intensive Level Survey
 ●​ Intensive level survey of Crest Drive, to include both the north and south sides. (The Phase 1 survey
 area only included the southern end of Crest Drive; the north side of the street may contain
 additional architecturally significant resources with a shared historic or architectural context.)
 ●​ See Map 3, Appendix C for recommended survey area.

National Register of Historic Places
 ●​ Further research regarding the development of the neighborhood and any associated architects
 and landscape architects would determine the neighborhood’s eligibility as a NRHD and any
 associated areas of significance. The neighborhood may be eligible under Criterion C: Architecture
 as well as additional criteria pending further research.

Local Designation
 ●​ Crest Drive does not appear to be facing major development pressure, though several houses did
 appear to have been substantially altered. If the neighborhood is deemed to be architecturally
 and/or historically significant, local designation would help to preserve its character.

Interpretation
 ●​ Further research is required to determine potential interpretive efforts.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 32
6.1.10.​ Intensive Level Survey and Documentation of Historic Cemeteries




Left: 19th century headstones in Combs Cemetery (also known as Combs Chapel Cemetery), Right:
Hester Cemetery

Eight historic cemeteries were located in the Phase 1 survey area (Resources 233, 236, 237, 402, 432, 434,
456, 457, see Table 5). Two cemeteries, the Confederate Cemetery (Resource 233) and the Walker Family
Plot (WA1188), are listed on the NRHD. Intensive-level surveys of the remaining six cemeteries would
determine if any of the cemeteries are eligible for listing on the NRHD and opportunities for preservation
and interpretation. An additional significant cemetery was noted outside of the city limits but within the
Fayetteville Planning Area: Baldwin (African American) Cemetery.

Cemeteries to Prioritize Survey Efforts:
 ●​ East Mountain Cemetery - Resource 236: Originally owned by David Walker, a prominent Arkansas
 politician and early White settler of Fayetteville, the cemetery is the final resting place of untold
 numbers of Black individuals, including those who were enslaved by Walker or employed by his
 family after emancipation. Many of the grave markers are in deteriorated condition or have been
 vandalized. Preserve Arkansas included East Mountain Cemetery on its 2025 Most Endangered
 Places list, noting that the property “is in need of comprehensive mapping and marker and fencing
 restoration.”8 In order to preserve its history and aid in the interpretation of the site, East Mountain
 Cemetery would benefit from archaeological documentation, grave marker restoration, and historic
 interpretation in the form of signage or other alternatives. The cemetery may also be eligible for
 local, state, or National historic designation.
 ●​ Baldwin (African American) Cemetery -Resource FPA005 (located outside the city limits but within
 the Fayetteville Planning Area).




8
 “2025 Most Endangered Places Press Release,” Preserve Arkansas, accessed December 4, 2025,
https://preservearkansas.org/what-we-do/most-endangered-2025/.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 33
6.2.​ Preservation Focus Areas

In addition to the potential historic districts outlined in the previous section, Post Oak also identified several
common historic themes throughout the Phase 1 survey area that may help inform City planning efforts.


 PHASE 1 SURVEY: RECOMMENDED PRESERVATION FOCUS AREAS

 6.2.1 Fayetteville’s Black Heritage
 6.2.2 Architecturally Significant Resources Associated with the U of A School of Architecture
 6.2.3 Ozark Vernacular Houses
 6.2.4 Native Stone and “Giraffe Rock” Houses



6.2.1.​ Fayetteville’s Black Heritage

The Phase 1 survey area included a historically Black residential community (See “Southeast Fayetteville”
on Map 2, Appendix C) that was extensively researched and documented in Post Oak’s 2025 Historic
Context Statement: “The Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville.”9 As was documented in that
report, many historic resources associated with the community have been lost, and the remaining
resources are at high risk of loss due to their age and development pressure. Many buildings in Southeast
Fayetteville’s historic Black community were assigned a Preservation Priority of “1” in this survey due to
their scarcity and risk of loss due to development and lack of resources for maintenance. As of 2025, no
historic resources related to Fayetteville’s Black Heritage are listed on the NRHD or are locally designated,
although recent efforts have been made by the City and local stakeholders to improve recognition of these
significant historic resources. The only resource associated with Fayetteville’s Black Heritage on the
Arkansas Register of Historic Places is Oaks Cemetery. The City should prioritize preservation planning
initiatives that facilitate the preservation and recognition of Black spaces in order to acknowledge the
essential contributions of Fayetteville’s Black citizens.

Specific recommendations related to Fayetteville’s Black Heritage are outlined in Section 6.1.1




9
  Megan Warley McDonald, “The Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville Historic Context Statement,”
accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4353/The-Historic-Black-Community-of-Southeas.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 34
6.2.2.​ Architecturally Significant Resources Associated with the U of A School of Architecture




Left: 1650 E. Clark Street (Resource 12) designed by E. Fay Jones. Right: 1607 E. Anson Street
(Resource 34) designed by James Lambeth.

Fayetteville is home to a plethora of architect-designed buildings, thanks to the presence of the University
of Arkansas (U of A) School of Architecture. U of A faculty designed untold numbers of buildings in
Fayetteville, some of which were documented in the 2024 Stantec Report “Historic Context Statement,
University Heights and Haskell Heights.”10 Among the significant U of A architects who designed buildings
in Fayetteville were John G. Williams, E. Fay Jones, Warren Segraves, Ernie Jacks, James Lambeth, and E.
Keith McPheeters, all of whom designed buildings in the Phase 1 survey area. Though several properties
designed by U of A faculty and students are already listed on the NRHP, dozens of others may be eligible
and several avenues are available for the recognition of these architecturally significant resources. Though
this report only documents the architect-designed properties in the Phase 1 survey area (see Table 6 in
Appendix D), the recommendations, below, would apply to the entire City of Fayetteville.

Recommendations:

 ●​ Amend the current draft of the “Residences of University Heights, Haskell Heights, and
 Markham Hill, Fayetteville, Arkansas” MPDF to be a city-wide document that more broadly
 focuses on properties designed by University of Arkansas School of Architecture faculty and
 students. The current draft of the above mentioned MPDF is well researched and provides a
 thorough historic context of the historic and architectural significance of the U of A School of
 Architecture. It clearly demonstrates the impact its faculty and students had upon the built
 environment of Fayetteville. As it is currently written, however, the MPDF is restricted to three
 Fayetteville neighborhoods and could not be used to nominate properties outside of that
 geographical area. As the Phase 1 survey results demonstrate, there are dozens of additional
 high-style properties designed by U of A architects elsewhere in the city. If the MPDF were
 successfully adapted to be a city-wide document, it would greatly streamline the process of
 nominating properties associated with U of A Architecture faculty in Fayetteville. Feedback from
 the National Park Service (NPS) on the most recent draft of the MPDF indicates that such a strategy
 may be successful:


10
  Stantec Consulting Services, “Historic Context Statement of University Heights and Haskell Heights,” accessed
December 4, 2025, https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4344/Historic-Context-Statement-of-University/.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 35
 Given the emphasis on resources designed by those associated with the University of
 Arkansas’ School of Architecture, we suggest exploring the possibility of a city- or
 statewide MPDF focused on this architectural theme. While we cannot guarantee a
 particular outcome, such an approach might provide a broader and more effective
 framework for evaluating significance.11

 Were the City to pursue this approach, information related to the U of A School of Architecture and
 its associated architects would be retained. Contextual information about the University Heights,
 Haskell Heights, and Markham Hill neighborhoods would be streamlined to focus on the context
 related to the concentration of architect-designed resources in those communities. Section F of the
 MPDF nomination form would be edited to more generally describe the property types designed
 by U of A faculty and students (i.e. Single Family Residential, Multi-Family Residential, Commercial,
 Government, etc). Geographical data would be amended to include the Fayetteville city limits (or
 specific boundaries agreed upon by City, SHPO, and NPS).

 ●​ Utilize the “The Arkansas Designs of E. Fay Jones, Architect” MPDF to nominate significant
 properties designed by E. Fay Jones. Euine Fay Jones was a prolific Arkansas architect who
 studied under Frank Lloyd Wright. He served as the first dean of the University of Arkansas School
 of Architecture, where he was a long-term member of the faculty. Several properties (see Table 6)
 designed by E. Fay Jones were identified in the Phase 1 survey area and could potentially be
 nominated under this existing statewide MPDF if they meet the registration requirements.12

 ●​ Establish NRHP historic districts in areas with concentrations of architecturally significant
 resources. Pending future phases of citywide survey efforts, NRHD nominations may be possible
 for resources in close geographic proximity to one another. If a citywide MPDF were approved,
 historic districts could be nominated under the MPDF cover to streamline the process. Post Oak
 identified one prominent cluster architecturally significant resources in the Phase 1 survey area just
 south of Rockwood Trail on Mount Sequoyah (see Map 2). Further research and survey efforts may
 indicate a potential National Register historic district; the north side of Rockwood Trail was outside
 the Phase 1 survey area and further phases may identify additional architect designed resources in
 the immediate area.




11
 Michelle Diedriech, Comments, Evaluation/Return Sheet for Residences of University Heights, Haskell Heights, and
Markham Hill, Fayetteville, Arkansas MPDF, July 17, 2025.
12
 Cheryl Nichols, “The Arkansas Designs of E. Fay Jones, Architect,” National Register of Historic Places Multiple
Property Documentation Form, National Park Service, accessed December 4, 2025,
https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/AssetDetail/e6d04895-858b-4ef6-9875-27279cb8f569.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 36
6.2.3.​ Ozark Vernacular Houses

Among the most at-risk historic properties in the Phase 1 survey area are modest, vernacular, wood-frame
residences representing some of Fayetteville’s oldest houses and earliest building traditions. According to
former U of A professor Jean Sizemore in her 1994 book on Ozark houses:

 Time is running out for the ordinary and unpretentious houses that people in the rural Arkansas
 Ozarks built for themselves in the period from 1830 to 1930 and for our opportunities to observe
 them. Since the structures are overwhelmingly constructed of wood, they are deteriorating rapidly.
 Many are vacant; the simplicity and practicality that are their essence are also their undoing, for
 they are largely unappreciated both by the families whose forebears built them and by most
 preservationists who are accustomed to prizing buildings that are imposing and unusual, rather
 than ordinary.13




Left: Resource 251, a remarkably intact Single Pen residence. Right: Resource 291, a Double Pen
residence. Both houses are located in the South Fayetteville neighborhood.

Post Oak documented several increasingly rare Ozark vernacular houses during the course of survey (see
Table 7 in Appendix D for examples). Though vernacular houses are inherently modest and typically
exhibit no distinguishable style other than their building form, they are some of the oldest residential
buildings in Fayetteville and represent the city’s late 19th and early 20th century settlement. Vernacular
residences were often constructed with readily available materials, including stone foundations and wood
or log walls. Some of the most common vernacular house types in Fayetteville include the single pen,
double pen, gable front, side gable, and the gabled ell (“bent house”). Alterations and additions were
common, as the small homes were added onto as families grew and time and finances allowed. In many
cases, these alterations have acquired significance in their own right. Ozark vernacular houses were
documented throughout the Phase 1 survey area, with the largest concentrations noted in the Southeast
and South Fayetteville neighborhoods.

Recommendations:

 ●​ Create a city-wide MPDF to streamline the listing of Fayetteville’s Ozark vernacular houses. A
 city-wide MPDF may be an avenue to streamline the process of nominating Ozark vernacular
 houses. If pursued, this strategy should begin with a discussion with AHPP, to include a discussion


13
 Jean Sizemore, Ozark Vernacular Houses: A Study of Rural Homeplaces in the Arkansas Ozarks 1830-1930. (The
University of Arkansas Press: 1994), 1.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 37
 of specific properties that might be nominated under the cover document. If an MPDF is not
 pursued, exceptionally intact examples may be individually eligible for National Register
 designation or warrant local designation.

6.2.4.​ Rustic, Native Stone, and “Giraffe Rock” Houses




Left: 201 E. Huntsville Road, a Giraffe Rock bungalow (Resource 248). Right: 514 S. Willow, a Giraffe
Rock house with blue/black mortar (Resource 371)

Arkansas and the greater Ozarks region is well known for its native stone buildings. In Fayetteville, most
native stone buildings consist of a wood frame building clad with slabs of native stone mortared together, a
building type alternatively known as slab rock, Ozark Mosaic, native stone, or giraffe rock. The term “giraffe
rock” was most commonly used when the mortar was painted white or black (instead of trying to match the
stone) which resulted in a pattern that resembled a giraffe’s coat pattern.14 The majority of Giraffe Rock
houses were constructed in the 1930s, when the building technique was popularized in the Ozark region
by the Missouri Agricultural Extension Service, which held workshops on what they called “cobblestone
construction.”15

Recommendations:

Create a city-wide MPDF to streamline the listing of Native Stone and/or Giraffe Rock buildings. Post
Oak documented Native Stone and Giraffe Rock Houses throughout the Phase 1 survey area. Due to their
dispersal throughout the City, an MPDF may provide the most efficient route to nominating these property
types to the NRHD. A number of standalone Giraffe Rock buildings could be listed under the MPDF, and
Post Oak also noted several small clusters of Giraffe Rock Houses (2-3 buildings) that could be listed as
small districts under the cover document. An MPDF would develop a single overarching context for this
construction technique, and both minimize redundancy and streamline the nomination process for these
buildings.




14
 Milton D. Rafferty, The Ozarks: Land and Life, (The University of Arkansas Press, 2001), 274.
15
  Debbie Sheals, “Ozark Rock Masonry in Springfield, ca. 1910-1955,” The Society of Architectural Historians MIssouri
Valley Chapter, Vol XIII, No. 2A, Summer 2006, 5.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 38
7.​ Bibliography/Relevant Resources

“2025 Most Endangered Places Press Release.” Preserve Arkansas. Accessed December 4, 2025,
 https://preservearkansas.org/what-we-do/most-endangered-2025/.

“A Window on the Past,” Texas Parks and Wildlife Archive, accessed December 4, 2025,
 https://tpwmagazine.com/archive/2019/jan/scout5_parknews/.

City of Fayetteville. “Heritage and Historic Preservation Plan.” Accessed December 4, 2025.
 https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4231/Heritage-and-Historic-Preservation-Plan.

City of Fayetteville. “Historic Sites” storymap. Accessed December 4, 2025.
 https://maps.fayetteville-ar.gov/HistoricSites/.

“Fayetteville Municipal Airport Hangar ‘White Hanger.’” Arkansas Heritage. Accessed December 4, 2025,
 https://www.arkansasheritage.com/arkansas-register/fayetteville-municipal-airport-hangar-white-ha
 ngar.

Hogan, J.B. and Kirby L. Estes. “The Early History of Fayetteville Municipal Airport.” Flashback 60, No. 2,
 (Summer 2010).

MacMillan, Owen. “Historical Looking Glass Unveiled in Ely Square.” The Chronicle-Telegram. Accessed
 December 4, 2025,
 https://chroniclet.com/news/440961/historical-looking-glass-unveiled-in-ely-square/

“Mann-Simons Site,” Historic Columbia, accessed December 4, 2025,
 https://www.historiccolumbia.org/tours/house-tours/mann-simons-site;

McDonald, Megan Warley. “The Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville Historic Context
 Statement.” Accessed December 4, 2025.
 https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4353/The-Historic-Black-Community-of-Southeas

“National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning.” Accessed
 December 4, 2025,
 https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB24-Complete_Part1t.pdf.

Nichols, Cheryl. “The Arkansas Designs of E. Fay Jones, Architect” National Register of Historic Places
 Multiple Property Documentation Form. National Park Service. Accessed December 4, 2025,
 https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/AssetDetail/e6d04895-858b-4ef6-9875-27279cb8f569.

Park, Sharon C. “Preservation Brief 31: Mothballing Historic Buildings.” Accessed December 4, 2025,
 https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/upload/preservation-brief-31-mothballing-buildings.pdf.

Rafferty, Milton D. The Ozarks: Land and Life. The University of Arkansas Press, 2001.

Sheals, Debbie. “Ozark Rock Masonry in Springfield, ca. 1910-1955,” The Society of Architectural Historians
 MIssouri Valley Chapter XIII, No. 2A, (Summer 2006).



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 39
Sizemore, Jean. Ozark Vernacular Houses: A Study of Rural Homeplaces in the Arkansas Ozarks
 1830-1930. The University of Arkansas Press, 1994.

“Smokey Hollow Commemoration.” Architect Magazine. Accessed December 4, 2025,
 https://www.architectmagazine.com/project-gallery/smokey-hollow-commemoration/.

Stantec Consulting Services. “Historic Context Statement of University Heights and Haskell Heights.”
 Accessed December 4, 2025.
 https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4344/Historic-Context-Statement-of-University.

Stevens, Craig W. The E. Fay Jones Guidebook: His Surviving Built Work. Blurb.com, 2011.

Fay Jones Collection, Special Collections, University of Arkansas Libraries.
 https://libraries.uark.edu/specialcollections/manuscripts/fayjones/.

Washington County Historical Society. Flashback: Journal of the Washington County Historical Society.
 Collection Digitized on Archive.org. Accessed December 4, 2025.
 https://archive.org/search?query=flashback+arkansas.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 40
Appendix A. Types of Historic Designation
This section discusses the criteria that the National Park Service and the AHPP use to determine NRHD
eligibility. It also outlines the use of National Register Multiple Property Documentation Forms, and the
process of local designation.

A.​ National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)

The National Register of Historic Places is a federally maintained list of historic resources that have been
determined worthy of preservation for their historic significance and is administered by the National Park
Service at the federal level and by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP) at the state level.
Both entities provide guidance for identifying and evaluating historic resources. Properties that may be
listed on the National Register include:

 ●​ Buildings
 ●​ Sites
 ●​ Structures
 ●​ Objects
 ●​ Districts

a.​ Criteria for Evaluation

NPS National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation defines criteria
used to determine eligibility for listing and provides guidelines on how to apply the criteria. The AHPP
Survey Procedures Manual provides additional information as well as instructions for completing the
AHPP’s Arkansas Architectural Resources Survey Forms and evaluating Arkansas’s historic resources.

Per NPS National Register Bulletin 15, historic resources are evaluated based on their:

● Area(s) of Significance
● Period of Significance
● Integrity

The areas and periods of significance are typically established during the preparation of a historic context,
which is then used to evaluate whether a property or district has significant associations within them. A
property or district is then evaluated for its historic integrity, which determines if enough of the historic
fabric associated with the property’s history is intact and legible enough that the property can continue to
convey that association.16




16
  National Park Service, National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation,
Revised 1995.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 41
b.​ Areas of Significance

The National Park Service has four established criteria under which a resource may be eligible for listing in
the NRHD. One or more criteria must be satisfied for eligibility. The resource must be a district, site,
building, structure, or object that retains integrity and meets one or more of the following criteria:

 ●​ Criterion A: Resources associated with events that have made a significant contribution to broad
 patterns of our history;
 ●​ Criterion B: Resources associated with the lives of persons significant in our past;
 ●​ Criterion C: Resources that embody the distinctive period of a type, period, or method of
 construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that
 represent a significance and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual
 distinction;
 ●​ Criterion D: Resources that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to
 prehistory or history.17

The area of significance is a broad historical theme associated with a property or area. Each historic
resource must be associated with a historic context in order to be determined eligible for the NRHP or
contributing to a potential district. Criterion D is typically utilized for below-ground and archeological
resources.

c.​ National Register Criterion Considerations

In general, resources eligible for listing in the NRHP are at least 50 years old and do not include
cemeteries, birthplaces or graves of historic figures, structures that have been moved from their original
locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties
that have achieved significance within the past 50 years.[3] However, NPS has determined seven criterion
considerations under which properties in the aforementioned list may qualify for the NRHP: Criterion
Considerations A through G.18

d.​ Period of Significance

Period of significance refers to the time period during which a property or district achieved its historic
significance, and may be limited to a single year (for example the year a building nominated for its
architectural significance was constructed) or a range of years and/or decades (for example a commercial
historic district that has continuously been a hub of business since its establishment to present day). The
period of significance typically ends at or prior to the 50-year historic cutoff at the time a property is listed,
although in some cases may extend beyond that date.

e.​ Seven Aspects of Integrity




17
 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation,
Revised 1995.
18
 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation,
Revised 1995.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 42
In addition to a property’s association with the identified area and period of significance, for a property to
be eligible for designation in the NRHP it must also retain integrity. Integrity is the retention of a substantial
number of historic features, materials, or qualities (known as character-defining features) from the period of
significance that give a resource “the ability [to] convey its significance.” Character-defining features will
vary depending on the property’s areas and periods of significance, for example a property significant for
its design would likely need to retain a majority of its original architectural elements and materials, while a
historic district associated with a working class community that frequently modified their homes over time
may emphasize form, setting, or neighborhood layout.

NPS identifies seven aspects of integrity to evaluate for NRHP eligibility:

 ● Location
 ● Design
 ● Setting
 ● Materials
 ● Workmanship
 ● Feeling
 ● Association

Historic resources must retain integrity in all or most of the seven aspects. A property will typically possess
at least several aspects of integrity, if not all, but it does not necessarily need to retain all seven aspects as
long as it is still able to convey its specific historic significance. Specific aspects of integrity may be more
important depending on the area of significance. For example, if a building is significant for its architecture,
then a high level of integrity of design, materials, and workmanship is important. If a building is significant
for its association with historic events or communities, integrity of association, feeling, location, and setting
may be more important.

A property should generally retain its character-defining features from its period of significance, which may
emphasize physical attributes like materials, workmanship, or design, or may focus on the associative
characteristics of feeling and association, depending on the property type. A property may have been
altered over time as different materials became available and as economic conditions allowed, impacting
integrity of design and materials. However, if the essential physical features and historic significance of the
property is still readable, such as through massing or other physical qualities, it may retain eligibility. For
example, on a residential property located within a historically economically disadvantaged area, the use of
inexpensive replacement materials on exterior features should not automatically reduce that property’s
historic integrity to render it ineligible; rather, it may reflect the economic constraints faced by working class
or low-income property owners and residents who endured systemic economic discrimination. Such
alterations—often made with affordability and durability in mind—can serve as tangible evidence of
long-term socio-economic inequality within a community. As a result, while these alterations may on the
surface impact integrity of materials, design, or workmanship, these alterations should not automatically
disqualify a property from conveying its historic significance, particularly under Criteria A or B.19

19
 For more information, see “Architecture 101 – The Architecture of Arizona’s Working Class Communities,”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=385Dw_YXOac&ab_channel=ArizonaHistoric Preservation (for the discussion of
integrity, forward to 36:54 of the video).; National Council on Public History, “Repairing National Register Nominations:
Underrepresented communities and integrity,” accessed January 30, 2024, https://ncph.org/history-at-work/repairing-
national-register-nominations-underrepresented-communities-and-integrity/.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 43
f.​ National Register Historic Districts

Historic districts are areas with concentrations of historic resources that share a common area(s) of
significance, period of significance, and that include a substantial number of resources that retain sufficient
integrity to convey the identified area(s) and period of significance. Properties in a district may be
contributing or non-contributing to the area and period of significance. For a historic district to be eligible
for listing on the NRHP, 50 percent or more of the properties within the nominated boundary need to
contribute to the district’s significance. 20

B.​ National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form (MPDF)

A National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form (MPDF) is a cover document that establishes
the historic context and significance for thematically related historic properties with a shared association
with trends or patterns of history. An MPDF organizes information about related properties and defines
National Register registration requirements tailored to specific types of properties, for example, properties
related to the development of the railroad industry in a particular state or region, properties associated with
or designed by a specific architect or in a shared architectural style, or properties associated with the
history of a specific ethnic group in a state, region, or city, among others. An MPDF includes broad historic
contexts that outline the historical patterns and trends that led to the creation of the property types that are
eligible for listing under the MPDF. An MPDF enables listing of historic properties that share related
historical associations or physical characteristics, regardless of geographic distance, and streamlines the
process of National Register listing for thematically related property types. In theory, this allows for shorter
and more efficient National Register nominations.

C.​ Local Historic District Designation

According to the State of Arkansas, per State Act 484, amended in 1965 by State Act 170 (§14-172-207),
municipalities can designate local historic districts which are overseen by historic district commissions
(HDCs). However, for a municipality to designate a local district it must either: a) already be listed in the
NRHP; or, b) have the support of more than 50 percent of owners within the proposed district. Arkansas
state law does not allow local designation of individual resources, however they may be listed in the
Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP), a state-level inventory of historic sites. 21

In Fayetteville, the City has a Historic Preservation Ordinance (Ordinance 2509, as revised, and City of
Fayetteville Code 33.226), which created provisions for establishing an HDC. The City also has the ability
to establish design guidelines for locally designated historic districts; currently there are design guidelines
for the locally designated White Hangar historic district. The Fayetteville HDC, per Ordinance 2509, has
design review authority over exterior alterations to properties within locally designated historic districts,
and owners must submit Certificates of Appropriateness (COAs) that demonstrate that changes are in



20
 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation,
Revised 1995.
21
 City of Fayetteville. “Heritage and Historic Preservation Plan.” Accessed December 4, 2025.
https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4231/Heritage-and-Historic-Preservation-Plan



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 44
keeping with the design guidelines in order to proceed with applications for building permits.22 The City
has also established design guidelines for the NRHP-listed Washington-Willow NRHD, however because
the district is not locally designated, these guidelines are not legally enforceable by the HDC.

In January 2026, Fayetteville’s City Council voted to approve the creation of the Oak Grove Historic
District. Consisting primarily of stone and craftsman houses, Oak Grove is the first residential local historic
district in Fayetteville. A petition for a local historic district in Southeast Fayetteville’s historic Black
community was recently certified by the city and review is underway.

The City of Fayetteville has succinctly outlined the benefits of local historic designation on the City’s
Historic Preservation FAQ page:

 A benefit of owning property in a local historic district is there are requirements in place that
 manage change to properties, so that any new or additional development has to fit with the
 existing neighborhood, according to the adopted design standards. It creates some certainty.
 There is often a public hearing for proposed changes so the neighborhood can be informed on
 what is being proposed and can comment on new development. The responsibility to comply with
 the design standards and get the required approvals is also applied to the neighborhood, with the
 expectation that exterior changes, additions and new construction will meet the adopted
 standards. When you have put a lot of investment into a historic property, this is a way to ensure
 that investment can be maintained after the property changes owners.23




22
 City of Fayetteville. “Heritage and Historic Preservation Plan.” Accessed December 4, 2025.
https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4231/Heritage-and-Historic-Preservation-Plan
23
 City of Fayetteville. “FAQ’s,” Accessed December 15, 2025, https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/FAQ.aspx?QID=930



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 45
 Appendix B. Previously Designated Historic Properties
Table 1. Previously Designated Historic Resources within the Phase 1 Survey Area

# NAME ADDRESS TYPE OF AREA(S) OF PERIOD OF
 DESIGNATION SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE

96 Clack House 725 E. Dogwood NRHP Architecture 1954-1956
 Lane

233 Fayetteville Confederate Rock St., NRHP Military 1873-c.1910
 Cemetery approximately 800
 feet N of jct. with
 Willow Ave.

482 Fayetteville Fire Department 4140 S. School Ave NRHP Community 1963-1965
 Fire Station # 3 Planning and
 Development;
 Politics/Governm
 ent; Architecture

483 Fayetteville Municipal Airport 4390 S. School Ave ARHP; Local Architecture 1943-4
 Hangar “White Hangar” Designation

451 Goff Farm Road Stone Bridge Goff Farm Road NRHP Engineering; C. 1860-1960
 Transportation

203 Happy Hollow Farm 1999 E. Citrine Link NRHP (Criterion B for C. 1909-1923
 association with (inferred)
 writer WIlliam
 Rheen Lighton
 inferred)

109 Headquarters House 118 East Dickson NRHP Unclear (1971
 Street nomination)

FPA Henry Madison Wood 3300 Leo Ammons ARHP Architecture C. 1870
004 Farmstead Road

227 Lynn Shelton American 28 South College NRHP Architecture; 1939-1945
 Legion Post No. 27 Ave Social History

191 Mount Sequoyah Cottages 808 and 810 East NRHD Entertainment/ C. 1920-1962
 Skyline Drive Recreation

163/ Mount Sequoyah Historic 150 NW Skyline NRHD Religion C. 1922-1972
187 District Drive

33 Noll, WIllis, Residence 531 N. Sequoyah NRHP Architecture 1950
 Drive




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 46
Table 1. Previously Designated Historic Resources within the Phase 1 Survey Area

# NAME ADDRESS TYPE OF AREA(S) OF PERIOD OF
 DESIGNATION SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE

66 Patrick, Dr. James, House 370 North Williams NRHP Architecture 1965-1966
 Drive

150 Segraves, Warren, House 217 North Oklahoma NRHP Architecture 1959
 Way

70 Wade-Heerwagen House 338 Washington Ave NRHP Architecture unclear
 (inferred)

237 Walker Family Plot 514 E. Rock Street NRHP Exploration/Settl 1838-1900
 ement;
 Politics/Governm
 ent; Social
 History

277 Walker-Knerr-Williams House Knerr Road NRHP Architecture 1872 (inferred)

218 Washington County College Ave. and E. NRHP Community 1904-1922
 Courthouse Center St. Planning and (inferred)
 Development;
 Politics/Governm
 ent; Architecture

229 Washington County Jail College and County NRHP Politics/Governm 1896
 Aves. ent; Architecture

(multi Washington-Willow Historic See Map 2 NRHD Architecture; 1853-1930
ple) District Community
 Planning;
 Economics;
 Education; Law

137 Wilson-Pittman- 405 E. Dickson St. NRHP Architecture C. 1866,
 Campbell-Gregory House 1870-1




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 47
Appendix C. Maps
Map 1. Overview map showing Fayetteville city Boundaries (dark blue), the Phase 1 Historic Resources Windshield Boundary including the City
Planning area (red), and the Phase 1 boundary within city limits (light blue).




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 48
Map 2. Potential historic districts in the Phase 1 survey area. Potential districts requiring further survey are highlighted in purple. Existing
NRHD districts are highlighted in orange. Potential boundary expansions for the Washington-Willow NRHD are highlighted in blue.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 49
Map 3. Potential historic districts in the Phase 1 survey area. Potential districts requiring further survey are highlighted in purple. Existing
NRHD districts are highlighted in orange.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 50
Map 4. Potential Nonnamaker Drive Historic District, highlighted in purple.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 51
Map 5. Potential Drake Field Historic District.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 52
Appendix D. Tables

 Table 5: Historic Cemeteries In Phase 1 Survey Area

  # Cemetery Name Important Notes Address/Parcel

237 Walker Family Plot (NRHP Listed) 765-12817-100

233 Confederate (NRHP Listed) 514 E Rock Street
 Cemetery 765-12762-000

236 East Mountain Several marked graves of early Black 765-12817-001;
 Cemetery residents of Fayetteville, most of whom were 765-12817-102;
 associated with the family of David Walker. 765-12817-100
 Many of the grave markers are damaged or in
 deteriorated condition and there is currently
 no interpretation in place.

402 Buckner Cemetery More research is required to determine age of 765-02313-100
 burials and potential significance.

457 Combs Cemetery/ Though more research is required, this 765-15276-000
 Combs Chapel appears to be a very old cemetery, with
 Cemetery burials dating as early as the mid-1800s. A
 historic metal sign is disassembled and stored
 on site.

456 Leeper Cemetery This is a small, enclosed plot containing the E Leeper Drive
 graves of the Leeper family, who were early 765-19962-100
 Fayetteville settlers. The site was altered due
 to a nearby development and may not retain
 sufficient integrity for listing.

432 Hester Cemetery Oldest grave is Thomas A Hester, d. 1866 5595 E Huntsville Rd
 001-10672-000

434 Holt Cemetery Sign on site says "Established 1855." 1100 Highbush Ave
 765-13151-100

FPA Baldwin (African African American Cemetery. A recently S. Mally Wagnon Rd
005 American) Cemetery erected sign indicates that it was created c. 523-10011-000
 1834, though further research is required.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 53
 Table 6. List of Known Properties Designed by U of A Architects Within Phase 1 Survey Area

 # Property Name/Address Architect Year of
 Construction

66 Dr. James Patrick House (NRHP listed), 370 N WIlliams Drive Ernie Jacks 1966

96 Clack House (NRHP listed), 725 E Dogwood Lane John WIlliams 1954

23 510 N Assembly Dr E. Fay Jones c. 1950

14 William H. Pryor House, 1008 E Trust Street E. Fay Jones c. 1945

177 H.R. Snow House, 828 E Skyline Drive E. Fay Jones c. 1961

12 Sequoyah Project, 1650 E Clark Street E. Fay Jones 1956

1 Carl and Jan Collier House, 2165 Manor Drive E. Fay Jones c. 1969

18 Alma Goetsh and Katherine Winckler House, 1619 E Clark E. Fay Jones c. 1967
 Street

467 2933 S College Drive E. Fay Jones 1987

460 The Rockwood Club, 380 W. 24th Street E. Fay Jones** 1947

117 SWEPCO Office, 300 N College Avenue Warren Segraves 1968

150 Warren Segraves House (NRHP listed), 217 N Oklahoma Way Warren Segraves 1959

400 Continuing Education Center, 612 S College Avenue Warren Segraves 1978

135 Fulbright Building Warren Segraves 1962

54 Segraves Building Warren Segraves c. 1970

27 1515 Clark Street James Lambeth c. 1970

24 Lambeth House, 1591 Clark Street James Lambeth c. 1971

34 1607 E Anson Street James Lambeth c. 1973

36 1585 E Anson Street James Lambeth c. 1980

485 Federal Aviation Administration Building at Drake Field E. Keith McPheeters c. 1962

484 Drake Field Terminal Building E. Keith McPheeters c. 1962

304 Happy Hollow Elementary School Gayland Witherspoon 1972
 and Murray Smart Jr.

**Jones’ involvement with the Rockwood Club may have been minimal

Note: The Willis Noll House (Resource 33, listed on the NRHP) was designed by Fayetteville native, Edward
Durrell Stone. Though Stone briefly attended U of A and was later a “visiting critic” he was not a member of
the U of A faculty.



 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 54
 Table 7: Representative Examples of Ozark Vernacular Houses in Phase 1 Survey Area

 # Address and Type Photo

251 235 S. East Avenue
 Single Pen




219 213 E. Center Street
 Single Pen
 Despite rear addition, replacement siding, and non-historic porch,
 the single pen form is still intact. This house appears to be
 depicted on an 1886 photograph taken from Mount Sequoyah,
 and is located in the historically Black neighborhood just
 southeast of downtown.

291 316 S. Block Avenue
 Double Pen




315 405 S. Locust Avenue
 Double Pen

 Note: Demolition permit recently issued (DEMO-2025-0127)




225 256 E. Mountain Street
 Gable Front




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 55
 Table 7: Representative Examples of Ozark Vernacular Houses in Phase 1 Survey Area

 # Address and Type Photo

250 234 S. Willow Avenue
 Gable Front

 Note: Rezoning request approved; redevelopment is likely in near
 future (RZN-2025-045)



261 241 E. Huntsville Road
 Side Gable/Folk Victorian
 (Off centered door may indicate that it was originally been a
 Double Pen)




398 3398 E. Huntsville Road
 Double Pen Log House
 Joseph Lee and Elizabeth Kirkham Fritz House.




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 56
 Table 8: Representative Examples of Native Stone and Giraffe Rock Houses in Phase 1 Survey Area

 # Address and Type Photo

248 201 E. Huntsville Road
 Giraffe Rock bungalow




294 338 S. Combs Avenue
 Giraffe Rock

 Note: Rezoning request approved; redevelopment is
 likely in near future (RZN-2025-038)




371 514 S. Willow Avenue
 Giraffe Rock with Blue/Black mortar

 Note: Rezoning request approved; redevelopment is
 likely in near future (RZN-2023-0005)




397 17 and 19 W. Martin Luther King Jr. Drive
395 Two nearly identical Giraffe Rock houses with
 contrasting white brick window and door surrounds.




13 700 N. Anna Place
 Ca. 1913 Native Stone residence and outbuildings




 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 57
TO: Historic District Commission

FROM: Kylee Cole, Long Range & Preservation Planner

MEETING DATE: March 12, 2026

SUBJECT: Proposed Southeast Fayetteville Local Historic District

Background:
On December 31, 2025, the City Clerk-Treasurer’s Office verified a resident-submitted a petition
office to propose a local historic district referred to as “Spout Spring Historic District”. The Clerk-
Treasurer’s office verified seventy-three (73) signatures out of the total of one-hundred forty-
three (143) property owners within the proposed boundary. Their final calculation shows that
51% of property owners within the proposed district signed the petition. The required
percentage of signatures according to the Arkansas Historic Districts Act is 51%.

The creation of local historic districts is supported by four elements of the City’s Heritage &
Historic Preservation Plan adopted in July 2023:
Heritage and Historic Preservation Master Plan Relevant Goals and Action Items
 1.9 Plan Review Include historic preservation staff in review of proposed major
 projects and zoning changes to determine impacts to historic
 resources.
 1.10 Demolition Pass an ordinance to allow for the review of proposed demolitions
 Ordinance for resources forty-five years or older. Staff to evaluate each
 property for significance. Work with property owner to discourage
 demolition. Reviews should be taken up by HDC as needed.
 3.7 Local Historic Poll NRHP historic district property owners to gauge interest in
 District becoming a local historic district. Based on poll results, prioritize
 Designation facilitation of local historic district designation.
 4.9 Community Publish information about historic preservation reviews and
 Engagement: demolitions of historic properties to increase transparency.
 Transparency

Boundary as Submitted:
The proposed boundary encompasses two areas located southeast of downtown. The northern
section includes 95 parcels roughly bounded by East Spring Street, North Walnut Avenue, East
Huntsville Road, and North Washington Avenue. The southern section includes 44 parcels
roughly bounded by South Willow Avenue, East 7th Street, South College Avenue., and East
South Street/East Huntsville Road. More specifically, the proposed boundaries are shown in
Figure 1.
Figure 1. Proposed Local Historic District Boundary as Submitted by Petitioners

Number of Resources within Boundary as Submitted:
 Preservation Priority Number of Properties
 1-High 26
 2-Moderate 25
 3-Low 12
History:
Forthcoming - Since the petition was submitted with the intent of creating a local historic district
in the context of Black historic occupation, much of this section of the report will speak to that
history and use information from the Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville Historic
Context Statement.

Neighborhood Architecture
Forthcoming.

Discussion:
Much of the proposed district is highly significant for its association with Black property
ownership from emancipation to present (Criterion A). To date around 40 properties (buildings
and vacant parcels) have been confirmed as historically or presently Black-owned. Currently,
staff is continuing to review detailed chain of title for each property including vacant or
undeveloped properties to understand the full extent of the historic Black neighborhood in and
around the proposed boundary. Many other properties were likely Black-owned and additional
time and research is needed to fully capture this history.




Figure 2. Black-Owned Properties
Recommendation:
Staff requires additional time to complete research and formulate recommendations related to
the proposed local historic district. Additional time will also allow for two public meetings
scheduled for March 18th and April 12th.

Properties:
All photos from Google Streetview (March 2025) unless otherwise noted.
 Address Photo
 216 E. Center
 Date of Construction: c.1910
 Style/Form: Single Pen
 Association(s): Potentially one of
 the oldest buildings in the area
 depicted on early aerial photos.
 Charles Means, Laquita Perry
 Means Jake & Velma Perry,
 Esora Savage, Frank Whitney.
 Contributing to Local Historic




 T
 District: Y
 Preservation Priority: High


 217 E. Center
 Date of Construction: c.1965
 Style/Form: Split Level
 F
 A
 Association(s): Jake & Velma
 Perry.
 Contributing to Local Historic
 District: Y




 R
 Preservation Priority: High


 323 E. Center




 D
 Date of Construction: c.1940
 Style/Form: Gable Front
 Association(s): Lafayette &
 Dorothy Barker.
 Contributing to Local Historic
 District: Y
 Preservation Priority: High
369 E. Center
Date of Construction: c.1889
Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent
House”
Association(s):
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Low



377 E. Center
Date of Construction: c.1999
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A




404 E. Center
 F T
 A
Date of Construction: c.1951
Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent
House”
Association(s): Preston &




 R
Isabelle Lackey
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High


410 E. Center

 D
Date of Construction: c.1920
Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent
House”
Association(s):
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High
411 E. Center
Date of Construction: c.1965
Style/Form: Side Gable
Association(s): Romey & Thelma
Thomason, Lois Dean Bryant.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate



412 E. Center
Date of Construction: c.1920
Style/Form: Front Gable
Association(s): Home of Labe
and Ballie Joiner, prominent
early 20th century Black
residents. On 1920 aerial. Jessie




 T
Bryant.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y




 F
Preservation Priority: High



417 E. Center
Date of Construction: c.1955
Style/Form: Minimal Traditional
Association(s): Home of
significant local Black residents
 A
Louis Bryant and Jessie Carr
Bryant.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
 R
 D
Preservation Priority: High




600 S. College
Date of Construction: 1932
Style/Form: Art Deco/Streamline
Modern
Association(s): Jefferson School
was constructed by the WPA as
a segregated school for white
children and was integrated in
1965 following the closure of the
Lincoln School.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High
612 S. College
Date of Construction: c. 1978
Style/Form: Mid-Century Modern
Association(s): Designed by
Warren Seagraves
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate



322 S. Combs
Date of Construction: c.1915
Style/Form: Gabled Ell/ “Bent
House
Association(s): White, working




 T
class ownership history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y




 F
Preservation Priority: Moderate

335 S. Combs
Date of Construction: 2023




 A
Style/Form: N/A
Association(s): N/A
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N




 R
Preservation Priority: N/A




338 S. Combs D
Date of Construction: c. 1930
Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe
Association(s): White, working-
class ownership history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate
342 S. Combs
Date of Construction: c. 1930
Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe
Association(s): White, working-
class ownership history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate




339 S. Combs
Date of Construction: c. 1935
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): White, working-




 T
class ownership history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate



344 S. Combs
 F
 A
Date of Construction: c. 1905
Style/Form: Queen Anne
Cottage
Association(s): Older than most




 R
houses in the area and higher
style. White ownership history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y




 D
Preservation Priority: High




350 S. Combs
Date of Construction: c.1975
Style/Form: Mid-Century Modern
Association(s): Historically Black
church founded in 1960s.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate
209 E. MLK
Date of Construction: c.1944
Style/Form: Side Gable
Association(s): Zetta Ollison
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate




502 E. Martin Luther King Jr.
Blvd.
Date of Construction: c. 1955
Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent
House
Association(s): Mary Geraldine




 T
Wilks
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate



156 E. Meadow
 F
 A
Date of Construction: c.1905
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): Hattie Bass,
Josie Flowers, Gregory Flowers.




 R
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: Low




 D
159 E. Meadow
Date of Construction: c.1925
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): Hayden & Lettie
Hall, Dorothy Buchanan.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: Low
160 E. Meadow
Date of Construction: c.1940
Style/Form: Double Pen
Association(s):
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y Preservation Priority:
High




171 E. Meadow
Date of Construction: c.1915
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): Helen Wilks,




 T
Hattie Bass, Roosevelt Willis,
Eddie Willis Jr., Cloteen Tucker
Contributing to Local Historic




 F
District: Y Preservation Priority:
High




165 E. Meadow
Date of Construction: c.1915
 A
 R
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): Henry & Cloteen
Tucker
Contributing to Local Historic




 D
District: Y Preservation Priority:
High
161 E. Meadow
Date of Construction: c.1915
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): James & Mary
Jane Logan
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y Preservation Priority:
High
204 E. Meadow
Date of Construction: c.1915
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): Hattie Bass,
Elizabeth Jackson, Charles
Ruffin, Ben Walton, Irene Walton
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y Preservation Priority:
High




365 E. Meadow
Date of Construction: c.1995
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A




 F T
220 S. Mill
Date of Construction: c.1915
Style/Form: Gable Front
 A
 R
Association(s): Historic white
working class ownership.
Currently owned by Mary Carr.
Contributing to Local Historic




 D
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High
222 S. Mill
Date of Construction: c.1915
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): White, working-
class ownership history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High
194 E. Mountain
Date of Construction: 2025
Style/Form: N/A
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A




256 E. Mountain
Date of Construction: c.1915
Style/Form: Gable Front




 T
Association(s): Ivy & Alfred
Hunter, Will York, Tom & Sallie
Barnes, JD & Clara Barnes,




 F
Bobby & Sherry Barker.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High




 A
 R
267 E. Mountain
Date of Construction: c.1963
Style/Form: Ranch
Association(s): Charlie York,




 D
David Dart, Arnold & Alice
Blackburn, Elva Blackburn.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High
120 E. Rock
Date of Construction: c.1915
Style/Form: Bungalow
Association(s): White working-
class ownership history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: Low
130 E. Rock
Date of Construction: c.1925
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): Not associated
with historic Black ownership,
but relatively intact gable
residence where many historic
age homes have been lost.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: Low




149 E. Rock
Date of Construction: c.1941




 T
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): Not associated
with historic Black ownership.




 F
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: Low



218 E. Rock
Date of Construction: c.1965
Style/Form: Side Gable
 A
 R
Association(s): Not associated
with historic Black ownership.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N




 D
Preservation Priority: Low


240 E. Rock
Date of Construction:
c.1965/2025
Association(s): Yvonne
Richardson Community Center
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A
281 E. Rock
Date of Construction: 2016
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A




106 N. Washington
Date of Construction: c.1959
Style/Form: Minimal Traditional
Association(s): Osborn Cox,




 T
Maggie McDowell, Virginia
Cravens.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y




 F
Preservation Priority: High



115 N. Washington
Date of Construction: c.1940
Style/Form: Minimal Traditional
Association(s): Georgia
 A
 R
Garrison, Erie Davis Stanton,
William & Willie Deffebaugh.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y




 D
Preservation Priority: High


116 N. Washington
Date of Construction: c.1975
Style/Form: Minimal Traditional
Association(s): Previously
owned by Preston Lackey, one
of the original seven students to
integrate Fayetteville High
School in 1954. Will York, Rufus
& Rosa Torrence, Amos &
Elnora Jackson, Preston &
Isabell Lackey.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High
118 N. Washington
Date of Construction: c.1940
Style/Form: Minimal Traditional
Association(s): Henry Jordan,
Leo Watson, Bennie Gene
Watson.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High




139 S. Washington
Date of Construction: c.1905
Style/Form: Bungalow




 T
Association(s):
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y




 F
Preservation Priority: Moderate


309 S. Washington




 A
Date of Construction: c. 1930
Style/Form: Bungalow
Association(s): White, working-
class ownership history.




 R
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate




313 S. Washington
Date of Construction: 2019
 D
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A
318 S. Washington
Date of Construction: c. 1933
Style/Form: Bungalow
Association(s): White, working-
class ownership history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate
319 S. Washington
Date of Construction: c. 1925
Style/Form: Bungalow
Association(s):
White, working-class ownership
history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate


321 S. Washington
Date of Construction: c. 2021
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A

 F T
 A
 R
325 S. Washington
 D
Date of Construction: c. 1930
Style/Form: Bungalow
Association(s): White, working-
class ownership history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate
411 S. Washington
Date of Construction: c. 1940
Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent
House”
Association(s): White, working-
class ownership history.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate


437 S. Washington
Date of Construction: 2016
Association(s):
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A




439 S. Washington
Date of Construction: c.1915
 F T
 A
Style/Form: Side Gable
Association(s): Cashmere
Funkhouser
Contributing to Local Historic




 R
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate




517 S. Washington
Date of Construction: 2002
Style/Form:
Association(s):
 D
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A

526 S. Washington
Date of Construction: 2000
Style/Form:
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A
531 S. Washington Ave.
Date of Construction: c. 1925
Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe
Association(s): Home of Ralph
"Buddy" Hayes (local jazz
musician) during the 1940s-
1970s. Sebel Tuttle.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High


532 S. Washington
Date of Construction: c.1940
Style/Form: Minimal Traditional
Association(s): Chrystal
Funkhouser, Carolyn
Funkhouser Bradford.




 T
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate

535 S. Washington
Date of Construction: c.1915
Style/Form: Minimal Traditional
 F
 A
Association(s): Rosie Parker
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate




 R
115 S. Washington
 D
Date of Construction: c.1980s
Style/Form: Contemporary
Association(s): St. James
Baptist Church. Replaced
original 1927 church destroyed
by fire in 1944.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A
7 N. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1915
Style/Form: Double Pen
Association(s): Parsonage of St.
James UMC
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate




7 N. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1884
Association(s): St. James UMC




 T
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High




 F
 A
 R
14 N. Willow


 D
Date of Construction: c.1910
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): Marden Carr,
Charlotte Hayes, Kirk & Audrey
Deffebaugh
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High




 Photo by Post Oak Preservation Solutions
105 N. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1923
Style/Form: Rustic
Association(s): Former Webb’s
Café (in the Negro Motorist’s
Green Book)
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y
Preservation Priority: High




106 N. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1950
Style/Form: Ranch
Association(s): Ozark Chapter
#295 Order of the Eastern Star,
Hill City Lodge #347, Elizabeth
 T
 Property as it appeared in 2023 (Google Streetview).




 F
 A
Buchanan, Tommie Flowers
Davis.
Contributing to Local Historic
District: Y Photo by Post Oak Preservation Solutions




 R
Preservation Priority: High




 D
127 N. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1965
Style/Form: Minimal Traditional
Association(s): Amanda Baylor Tuttle,
Willie C. & Hazel Buchanan
Contributing to Local Historic District: Y
Preservation Priority: High




 Photo by Post Oak Preservation Solutions
119 S. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1925
Style/Form: Gable Front




 T
Association(s): Ralph & Mary Rogers
Contributing to Local Historic District: Y
Preservation Priority: High




 F
 A
218 S. Willow
Date of Construction: 1994
Style/Form:
 R
 D
Association(s):
Contributing to Local Historic District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A
234 S. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1905
Style/Form: Gable Front
Association(s): Theopolis Hall Jr, Clara
Hall, Loretta Blackburn Carr, Jack Carr
Contributing to Local Historic District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate




437 S. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1938
Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent House”




 T
Association(s): Alice Dennis, Jack Carr,
Robert & Daisy Rucker, Henry & Marie
Childress
Contributing to Local Historic District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate



 F
 A
440 S. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1930
Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe
Association(s): White, working-class




 R
ownership.
Contributing to Local Historic District: Y
Preservation Priority: High




506 S. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1930
Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe
Association(s): Lafayette & Dorothy
 D
Barker
Contributing to Local Historic District: Y
Preservation Priority: High
514 S. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1930
Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe
Association(s): Bobby & Roberta
Morgan
Contributing to Local Historic District: Y
Preservation Priority: High




525 S. Willow
Date of Construction: 1997
Contributing to Local Historic District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A




619 S. Willow
Date of Construction: c.1960
Style/Form: Front Gable
Association(s): Clarence & Margaret
 F T
 A
Smith
Contributing to Local Historic District: Y
Preservation Priority: Moderate




588 S. Willow

 R
 D
Date of Construction: 2026
Contributing to Local Historic District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A
Notes: Front building in photo.
576 S. Willow
Date of Construction: 2026
Contributing to Local Historic District: N
Preservation Priority: N/A
Notes: Rear building in photo.




 Properties to Consider for Inclusion:
Oaks Cemetery (PID: 765-14935-010)
Date: c. 1867-1963
Associations: Only purposefully planned
Black cemetery in Fayetteville. Listed in
ARHP in 2014.1




 T
Contributing to Local Historic District: Y
Preservation Priority: High




 F
 Photo Source: Encyclopedia of Arkansas, “Oaks Cemetery,” 2021.




 A
East Mountain Cemetery (PID: 765-
12817-000, 765-12817-001, 765-12817-
002)
Date: c.1840-1961




 R
Association(s): Includes the burials of
Black individuals who were enslaved
and/or employed by the David Walker
family along with burials of other white




 D
Fayetteville families. The property was
included on Preserve Arkansas’s 2025
Most Endangered Places List.2
Contributing to Local Historic District: Y
Preservation Priority: High

 Attachments:
 • Excerpt from Arkansas Historic Districts Act
 • City Clerk Treasurer Verification Letter




 1
 J.B. Hogan, “Oaks Cemetery,” Encyclopedia of Arkansas, June 16, 2023, accessed February 3, 2026,
 https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/oaks-cemetery-16676/.
 2 City of Fayetteville, Historic Context Statement – The Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville, 15.

 Preserve Arkansas, “2025 Most Endangered Places,” September 15, 2025, accessed February 3, 2026,
 https://preservearkansas.org/what-we-do/most-endangered-2025/.
 F T
 A
 R
D
 F T
 A
 R
D
TO: Historic District Commission

FROM: Kylee Cole, Long Range & Preservation Planner

MEETING DATE: March 12, 2026

SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment to Oak Grove Local Historic District

Background:
On February 3, 2026 property owners at 515 N. Park Avenue submitted a written request for
inclusion in the Oak Grove Historic District. This proposed addition includes property to the west
of the current boundary along Park Avenue. This property was not included within the original
boundary as proposed by petitioners in the initial Oak Grove Historic District and the property
owner requests to be included.

The creation of local historic districts is supported by four elements of the City’s Heritage &
Historic Preservation Plan adopted in July 2023:
Heritage and Historic Preservation Master Plan Relevant Goals and Action Items
 1.9 Plan Review Include historic preservation staff in review of proposed major
 projects and zoning changes to determine impacts to historic
 resources.
 1.10 Demolition Pass an ordinance to allow for the review of proposed demolitions
 Ordinance for resources forty-five years or older. Staff to evaluate each
 property for significance. Work with property owner to discourage
 demolition. Reviews should be taken up by HDC as needed.
 3.7 Local Historic Poll NRHP historic district property owners to gauge interest in
 District becoming a local historic district. Based on poll results, prioritize
 Designation facilitation of local historic district designation.
 4.9 Community Publish information about historic preservation reviews and
 Engagement: demolitions of historic properties to increase transparency.
 Transparency

Boundary:
The proposed amendment would modify the district’s western boundary along North Park Avenue
to encompass the subject property. More specifically, the boundaries are shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Proposed Boundary Amendment


History:
The Oak Grove Historic District, located just north of Fayetteville’s historic commercial
downtown, extends roughly between Highland Avenue on the east, North Park Avenue on the
west, West Louise Street on the north, and West Maple Street on the south. This area contains
land originally incorporated into the city through the Oak Grove and Englewood Additions in the
early 1900s (Figures 2 & 3).




Figure 2. 1907 Plat Map of Englewood Addition. Portion of proposed
district outlined in red.

This area broadly captures the eastern portion
of the Wilson Park Historic District (NRHP).
As outlined in the National Register of Historic
Places nomination, “the initial development of
the Wilson Park District occurred in the early
part of the century during a boom period for
Fayetteville.”1 The development of Oak Grove
and the far eastern portion of the Englewood
Addition was primarily led by Noah Fields
Drake, a geologist and University of Arkansas
professor.2

After the construction of his family home at
501 N. Forest Ave., Drake tried his hand at Figure 2. 1908 Plat Map of Oak Grove Addition. Portion in
 proposed district outlined in red.
1
  Kenneth Story, “Wilson Park Historic District National Register of Historic Places Nomination”, Arkansas Historic Preservation
Program, February 2, 1995.
2
  Drake was born on January 30,1864 near Summers, around 20 miles west of Fayetteville. He graduated in 1888 from the
Arkansas Industrial University (now University of Arkansas) with a degree in civil engineering. After graduation, he worked on the
Arkansas Geological Survey, then relocated to Texas for work with the State Geological Survey. In 1893, he followed mentor Dr.
J.C. Banner to Leland Stanford University in California, where he earned several degrees, including a Ph.D. in geology in 1897.
Following graduation, he spent one year with the United States Geological Survey before accepting a position at Pei Yang
University in Tientsin China to teach geology and mining and worked on several high-profile government projects.
In 1911, Drake returned to the U.S. and accepted a position at the University of Arkansas as a professor of geology and mining.
Drake served as the state geology, chair of the Geology Department, and curator of the University Museum before retiring from
academia in 1920.
residential and commercial real estate development. He purchased lots in the Oak Grove and
Englewood additions, including the subject property, and revised the plats. Drake constructed
eleven residences between 1925 and 1936, many of which are located in the Oak Grove Local
Historic District.3 Other lots within and around the neighborhood were sold and developed by
owners, including the property at 515 N. Park Ave. which Drake sold to James Gordon Davis
and Mildred H. Davis on February 2, 1945.

Drake was instrumental in the development of Wilson Park, Fayetteville’s original City Park, just
northwest of the neighborhood. He and other businessmen formed the City Park Company,
which improved the park and built the first permanent pool in 1926.4 Drake was also vital in the
establishment of the municipal airport. In 1929, he donated $3,500 to the city to purchase the
land for an airport, then in 1947 the City renamed the airport Drake Field in honor of Noah
Fields Drake.5

Architecture of Oak Grove
The Oak Grove neighborhood is architecturally distinctive, with a high concentration of
Craftsman homes, including significant examples of residences constructed by Noah Fields
Drake known locally as “Rock Houses.”6

Most of the homes within the boundary feature some level of Craftsman detail or influence.
Many feature prominent front porches, deeply set windows, exposed rafter tails, and low-pitched
gabled roofs, characteristic of the Craftsman style.7

The residence at 515 N. Park Avenue is primarily a plain/traditional design with some minor
Craftsman details. Like the residences at 9 W. Davidson St., 506 N. Forest Ave., and 511 N.
Forest Ave., the home leans almost to the minimal traditional with a simple rectangular form and
very shallow overhanging eaves. Narrow, square railings, low-pitched side-gable roof, and
textured lap siding provide some hints toward the Craftsman style seen elsewhere in the
neighborhood. This home was constructed around 1945, later than most other homes in the
district and during a period when the popularity of Craftsman style was beginning to wane and
serves as an important bookend to the early construction of the neighborhood.

Discussion:
The proposed addition to the district is significant for its part in the development of the
neighborhood and the end of Noah Fields Drake’s influence on residential development in Oak
Grove.

Recommendation:
Staff recommend the Commission forward the Local Historic District amendment to the Planning
Commission and State Historic Preservation Office for review and comment.

Attachments:
 • Excerpt from Arkansas Historic Districts Act • Chain of Title
 • Property Photos • City Clerk Treasurer Verification Letter


3
  He created Drake’s Replat of Block IV of the Revised Plat of Gate’s [sic] Subdivision to Oak Grove Addition and Drake’s Replat of
Blocks I and VI of Englewood Addition. Four of Drake’s houses are located on Park Avenue, six of them on West Davidson Street
and one on Highland Avenue. Dowling, “Building a Vernacular Neighborhood and Beyond.”
4
  Story, “Wilson Park Historic District.”
5
  Wappel and Garrison, On the Avenue, 9.
6
  Cyrus A. Sutherland with Gregory Herman, Claudia Shannon, Jean Sizemore Jeannie M. Whayne and Contributors, "Wilson Park
and Rock Houses", [Fayetteville, Arkansas], SAH Archipedia, eds. Gabrielle Esperdy and Karen Kingsley, Charlottesville: UVaP,
2012—, http://sah-archipedia.org/buildings/AR-01-WA20, accessed: October 6, 2025.
7
  Virginia Savage McAlester, A Field Guide to American Houses, (New York: Knoft, 2023), 567.
 Photos8




8 All photos from Zillow, accessed 3.6.2026, https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/515-N-Park-Ave-

Fayetteville-AR-72701/72850274_zpid/?.
Chain of Title
 Date Book/Page Grantee Grantor
 11.15.2019 2019/35324 Max F. McAllister III Rahmat
 & Karen J. McAllister Sadelisoebagia
 Soemadipradja
 8.10.2002 2002/116368 Rahmat Lewis Stanley Deen
 Sadelisoebagia
 Soemadipradja
 6.23.1997 97/41810 Lewis Stanley Deen John M. & Kimberly
 Hooker
 5.21.1997 97/37634 John M. & Kimberly Pine Tree
 Hooker Investments LLC
 3/18/1997 97/16951 Pine Tree Robert Ross
 Investments LLC
 8.21.1984 1118/314 Robert Ross Robert Scott
 Thompson
 4.26.1984 1107/378 Robert Scott Douglas D. Knapp &
 Thompson Sandra J. Pringle
 3.26.1983 1059/427 Douglas D. Knapp & Bennett Warren
 Sandra J. Pringle Holtzclaw & Mary
 Katherine Holtzclaw
 12.20.1974 880/6962 Bennett Warren J. Foster Holtzclaw
 Holtzclaw & Mary & Grayce Fay
 Katherine Holtzclaw Holtzclaw
 6.1.1970 791/327 J. Foster Holtzclaw Bennett A. Shiley &
 & Grayce Fay Matilda Shiley
 Holtzclaw
5.1.1956 486/537 Bennett A. Shiley & Mildred H. Davis
 Matilda Shiley (widow of James
 Gordon Davis)
4.8.1954 461/14 James Gordon George McKinney &
 Davis Lillie Mae McKinney
2.2.1945 437/258 James Gordon N.F. Drake & Lota
 Davis & Mildred H. West Drake
 Davis

Meeting of the Historic District Commission
 February 12, 2026, 5:30 PM
 City Hall Rock Street Annex Meeting Room & Zoom

NOTE: The February 12, 2026 Historic District Commission meeting was held in person
and online. Staff were present in person.

Members: Chair Christine Myres, Meredith Mahan, Mark Harper, Cheri Coley, Jennifer Didway,
Tommie Flowers Davis, and Karen Rorex

City Staff: Kylee Cole – Long Range & Preservation Planner; Britin Bostick - Long Range
Planning & Special Projects Manager

 Call to Order: 5:30 PM

 In Attendance: Vice Chair Cheri Coley, Meredith Mahan, Jennifer Didway, Mark Harper,
 Tommie Flowers Davis, Karen Rorex, Kylee Cole, Britin Bostick, and Kaci Black.

 Approval of Minutes from the January 8, 2026 Meeting: Motion to accept by Commissioner
 Mahan, second by Commissioner Harper. Motion passed unanimously by voice vote.

 Unfinished Business:
 1. Downtown Design Overlay District Review: Cole recapped the sections for
 commercial buildings and last meeting’s discussion of columns, arches, pedestals,
 etc. She also presented a section for windows, skylights, and doors with a focus on
 non-historic age commercial buildings. Cole questioned the application of the
 standards, which are typical of the treatment for historic buildings rather than new
 commercial buildings. Requirements for sills, operable windows, and door finishes
 may not be consistent with commercial buildings generally, and as all window
 configurations are permitted, keeping that statement seems potentially unnecessary.
 Cole does want to cover opacity and facades in the next meeting as those standards
 do come up and not infrequently are the subject of variance requests. That particular
 topic may require a deep dive with the Commission.
 2. Citywide Survey Ph. 1 Update: Cole announced Post Oak Preservation Solutions is
 working ahead of schedule and Post Oak is working to finalize the documents. They
 are including additional photos and the final document is expected around the first of
 March. Cole expects to have that document for the Commission at the March
 meeting.
 New Business:
 1. Oak Grove Design Guidelines: Cole introduced the document presented to the
 Commission with a congratulations to the Commission for their support and the
 neighbors for their efforts. Now that the district is established it is time to continue the
 process by looking at design guidelines. Cole worked with Oak Grove property
 owners beginning with a template based on their desired outcomes and 4-5 owners
 met and edited the document to capture their top priorities, which were new
 construction, demolitions, and a few very specific site features such as retaining
 walls and roof forms. The end result was two documents to act as one, and the
 owners are asking for a combination of mandatory guidelines for new construction,
 changes to roofs, relocation of historic buildings, and retaining walls, which are
 common to the neighborhood, as well as demolition of historic properties. Stone
 retaining walls are a priority as part of the historic landscape and site design.

 Owners are additionally proposing advisory guidelines, which would not require the
 public hearing process but that set important best practices considered valuable as a
 guide for changes to historic properties. These are tailored to the dominant
 Craftsman and early 20th century architectural styles in the district. The advisory
 guidelines include landscaping and other prominent site features.

 Vice Chair Coley asked if future owners will be handed the set of rules upon
 purchase of property. Cole responded that while the City is not typically included or
 consulted on the sale of property, the information will be available online and should
 be caught in the due diligence process. Commissioner Mahan recommended special
 street signs for the district and other Commissioners agreed. Cole asked for
 Commissioners to review the guidelines document before the next meeting and that
 ultimately the Commission would need to formally adopt the document when
 finalized. Commissioner Rorex asked about enforcement if a building were
 demolished without approval? Bostick replied that it would be treated similarly to
 other development work without approval, which is handled by the City Prosecutor’s
 office. Cole noted that penalties can be $500 per day in instances of violation and
 that a Stop Work Order is typically issued.

Announcements:

 1. Cole announced that the Certified Local Government award of approximately $47,000.
 She discussed with Commissioners that this is less than requested, and the phase 2
 survey project scope was estimated to cost approximately $85,000, and staff are
 working to see if additional budget can be available.
 2. Cole announced that the annual Historic Preservation Awards are open and awards will
 be presented in May.

Adjourned: 6:01 PM




 2