HomeMy WebLinkAbout20220406
Gregory Smith, Chair Vernell Doyle
Lloyd Yavener, Vice Chair Michael Lushbaugh
Ann Aldrich Kourtney Lowery
Edith Wallace Jeffrey A. Cline, BOCC Rep HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OF WASHINGTON COU NTY, MARYLAND
WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
100 West Washington Street, Suite 2600 | Hagerstown, MD 21740 | P: 240.313.2430 | F: 240.313.2431 | TDD: 7-1-1
AGENDA
April 6, 2022, 7:00 p.m.
Washington County Administration Complex, 100 West Washington Street, Room 2001, Hagerstown, MD 21740
**Masks are encouraged in all County Buildings regardless of vaccination status**
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
MINUTES
1. Minutes of the March 2, 2022 meeting *
OTHER BUSINESS
1. Design Guidelines
a. Continue discussion of the document starting at Standards for Review
b. Revision Comments *
2. National Preservation Month (May)
a. Proclamation- May 3, 2022, Time TBD
b. Survey - https://arcg.is/0S5984 *
c. Social Media Post Proofs *
3. Staff Report
a. Staff Reviews *
b. Staff Updates
i. Town HDC MOU Update
ii. MAHDC Law and Procedures Training – April 28, 6pm (Virtual)
iii. MAHDC Symposium *
ADJOURNMENT
UPCOMING MEETING
1. Wednesday, May 4, 2022, 7:00 p.m.
*attachments
The Historic District Commission reserves the right to vary the order in which the cases are called. Individuals
requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Washington County Planning Department at 240-
313-2430 to make arrangements no later than ten (10) days prior to the meeting. Notice is given that the agenda
may be amended at any time up to and including the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY March 2, 2022
The Washington County Historic District Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Wednesday, March
2, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. at the Washington County Administrative Complex, 100 W. Washington Street, Room
2001, Hagerstown, MD.
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Commission members present were: Greg Smith, Chairman, Lloyd Yavener, Ann Aldrich, Vernell Doyle, Michael
Lushbaugh, Kourtney Lowery, and Edie Wallace. Staff members present were: Washington County Department
of Planning & Zoning: Meghan Jenkins, GIS Coordinator and HDC Staff member.
MINUTES
Motion and Vote: Mr. Yavener made a motion to approve the minutes of the February 2, 2022 regular meeting
as presented. The motion was seconded by Ms. Aldrich and unanimously approved.
OTHER BUSINESS
Design Guidelines
Ms. Jenkins presented a draft of the Design Guidelines for members to review and make comments. The
following are recommendations made by the members to include in the Guidelines:
• Add an introduction explaining historic zoning (including items such as Historic Preservation and
Antietam Overlay zones) and tax credits.
• Add Cemeteries in the Table of Contents
• Include historic Mills as a section
• Wider margins to allow for printing and binding
• Page numbers should be centered on the bottom of the pages
• Any reference to another document should be linked each time it is mentioned
• Purpose of the Design Guidelines section: Pg. 1, 1st paragraph – Define historic period; Pg. 1, 2nd
paragraph, 2nd sentence – clarify this is exterior changes, not all changes to historic structures
• Application Requirements section: Pg. 2 – add a paragraph to clarify what requires an application
• Demolition Permit Evaluation: Pg. 8 – See Ms. Aldrich’s notes
• Pg. 14 - 1760-1790: 3rd bullet – Do not capitalize arches
• Pg. 15 – Change the spelling to Plane
• Pg. 16 – Georgian: 7th bullet – Remove the reference “Adam”
• Pg. 23 – Colonial Revival: 4th sentence, Victorian-era design; Add the location of the homes under the
pictures, beside the Inventory number
• Page 24 - 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: Change wording
• Page 25-Switch Bungalow and Ranch Style orders; Also, switch paragraphs on Page 24 so Bungalow
comes before Ranch Style; Need a different photo of a bungalow
• Page 27- Switch photos (stone walls should be first photo)
• Page 29 – Check the style of gas stations; Find a photo of a smaller gas station to add here
• Page 28 - Commercial Buildings section: 3rd bullet point – correct zigzags; Commercial Buildings
section, 1st bullet – change emphases to elements
• Page 30 - Ecclesiastical Architecture – there should be a photo of a German double door church
(separate doors)
We will continue our review at the next meeting at “Standards for Review”.
National Preservation Month (May)
Ms. Jenkins reminded members that National Preservation month is May. Staff is planning to promote
preservation on the County’s website and facebook page as we did last year. The following are suggestions for
topics: Introduction to Preservation, the HP overlay, MHT Easements and why they are important, new
resources available on the County’s HDC webpage, and the Design Guidelines.
Ms. Aldrich stated that there will be two workshops at the Saylor House in May dealing with preservation. Ms.
Doyle also noted that Washington County Gives is May 11th where people may make donations to historic
preservation efforts. It was suggested that the Board of County Commissioners present a certificate of
acknowledgement for Preservation month. Preservation awards will be presented by the Historic Advisory
Committee on May 17th.
Staff Report
• Staff Reviews: Ms. Jenkins stated a written report was provided.
• Staff Updates:
o Ms. Jenkins has applied for the CLG education grant so we will have funding for trainings in the
next fiscal year.
o The HP overlay mailing was sent out. We have had one contact from Clear Spring. Ms. Jenkins
was also contacted by a property owner on Business Parkway who owns an historic house and
barn and would like to protect the house.
o We need to schedule an MAHDC training in April. All members should contact Ms. Jenkins with
available dates for the training.
o Ms. Jenkins announced that Pat Schooley’s husband has passed away. Staff will send
condolences on behalf of the HDC.
o Staff was contacted by the property owner of 14847 Fairview Road who wants a National
Register plaque for his property due to its historical significance. Staff has contacted MHT and
will follow-up with the property owner.
UPCOMING MEETING
The next meeting is scheduled for April 6, 2022 at 7:00 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms. Aldrich made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:20 p.m. The motion was seconded by Ms. Wallace and
so ordered by the Chairman.
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________________________
Jill L. Baker, AICP
Director, Washington County Dept. of Planning &
Zoning
Design Guidelines for
Historic Structures
Washington County, Maryland
Adopted 202x
ii Historic Structures
Acknowledgements
Historic District Commission:
Gregory Smith, Chair
Lloyd Yavener, Vice Chair
Ann Aldrich
Vernell Doyle
Kourtney Lowery
Michael Lushbaugh
Edith Wallace
Jeffrey A. Cline (BOCC Representative)
Former Historic District Commission
Members:
Robert Bowman II
Thomas G. Clemens
Kurt Cushwa
Michael Gehr
Chris Horst
Sandra D. Izer
Gary W. Rohrer
Charles R. Stewart
Merry Stinson
Christine Toms
Carla Viar
David Wiles
County Staff:
Jill Baker, AICP, Director, Department of Planning & Zoning
Debra Eckard, Administrative Assistant, Department of Planning & Zoning
Meghan Jenkins, GISP, GIS Coordinator/HDC Staff person, Department of Planning & Zoning
Stephen Goodrich, AICP, Former Director, Department of Planning & Zoning
Wyatt Stitely, Comprehensive Planner, Department of Planning & Zoning
Special Acknowledgements:
The Maryland Historical Trust
Preservation Maryland
Washington County Historical Trust (WCHT)
Clear Spring Historical Association (CSHA)
Cover Photos (Clockwise)
Burnside Bridge, Plumb Grove
Mansion, Church of the Brethren,
Antietam Observation Tower
Adopted:
XX, XX, 202X
Design Guidelines iii
Table of Contents
Purpose of the Design Guidelines
Historic District Commission
HDC Review Areas
Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties
Application Requirements
Evaluation Process
Demolition
A Short History of Washington County
Architectural Styles of Washington County
Vernacular Forms 18th-19th Century
Georgian
Federal
Greek Revival
Italianate/Italian Villa
Second Empire
Queen Anne and Other Victorian Styles
Colonial Revival
Classical Revival
Twentieth Century
Mill Complexes
Common Accessory Structures
Commercial Buildings
Commercial Buildings Post 1930
Gas Stations
Ecclesiastical Architecture
Schoolhouses
Historic Markers
Standards for Review
Standards for Rehabilitation
Guidelines
Setting and Site
Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings
Additions to Historic Buildings
New Construction and Accessory
Buildings
Site and Building Lights
Signs
Solar and Other New Technologies for
Environmental Sustainability
Hazard Mitigation
Rural Villages Inventory
Glossary
This page is intentionally left blank
Design Guidelines 1
Purpose of the Design Guidelines
Mong-Linger Farm, Spring House, WA-IV-004
These design guidelines are a set of guiding
principles that establish a basis for the
Historic District Commission’s (HDC)
recommendations, approval, or denial of
applications. The HDC uses these
Guidelines and the Secretary of Interior’s
Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties to determine if proposed work is
appropriate for properties that fall under its
review. Maryland Land Use Code S8.101-
8.501 and Article 20 of the Washington
County Zoning Ordinance require the HDC
to base its decisions on these documents.
Conformance with the Secretary’s Standards
is also a condition of the County’s Certifled
Local Government status, a program
administered by the National Park Service
(NPS) and Maryland Historical Trust (MHT),
which is the state’s federally designated
State Historic Preservation Oiffce (SHPO).
These guidelines provide guidance for the
protection and enhancement of signiflcant
historic structures, sites, and districts.
Additionally, the guidelines deflne the
appropriateness of requested exterior
changes to existing historic structures and
the approval of harmonious new
construction within historic districts with
attention to scale, massing, proportion,
materials, and height.
2 Historic Structures
Historic District Commission
The Historic District Commission (HDC) was created in 1986 and its duties and powers
are largely housed in the Zoning Ordinance for Washington County. The HDC is
responsible for reviewing applications which are affected by select Rural Villages in the
County (see Rural Villages Inventory), the Antietam Overlay 1 or Antietam Overlay 2
(AO) zoning districts, and the Historic Preservation (HP) zoning overlay. In addition,
applications affecting properties on the Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties
(MIHP) are also reviewed. The HDC makes recommendations regarding legislation,
applications for zoning text or map amendments, special exceptions, variances, site
plans, subdivisions or other proposals affecting historic preservation or historic
resources. Other duties of the HDC include:
• Recommend programs and legislation to the Board of County Commissioners and
Planning Commission to encourage historic preservation
• Serve as a clearing house for information, provide educational materials and
information to the public and undertake activities that advance the goals of historic
preservation
• Development of additional duties and standards. For example, criteria to be used in
the review of building permit applications
• Prepare, adopt, publish and amend additional guidelines to provide adequate
review materials for applications including HP and building permits
• Oversee maintenance and updating of the inventory of Washington County Historic
Sites
Bank Barn, Rufus Wilson Complex, WA-V-074
Design Guidelines 3
Certified Local Government
Washington County is the only County in Western Maryland currently designated as a
Certifled Local Government (CLG). The County obtained the designation in August of
1991. While the Certifled Local Government program is a Federal-State-local
partnership administered through Maryland Historical Trust (MHT), it is mentioned
here because the Historic District Commission (HDC) acts as the required qualifled
historic preservation commission for the program.
Beneflts of becoming a CLG include: eligibility to compete for funds to conduct
projects that promote preservation, CLG sub-grant funds, ability to participate in the
CLG Educations Set Aside Program, formal participation in the National Register
nomination process, annual performance evaluations, and priority technical
assistance. Being designated as a CLG means that the County is recognized by the
National Park Service as being able to participate in the national policy of
preservation.
National Register of Historic Places and Section 106 Review
The National Register is a tool that is used to document historic resources that are
signiflcant to the Nation and worthy of preservation. The National Register does not
have regulatory power but it does provide a process for additional review for
resource impact when Federal or State funding or permitting is involved in a
project. It also provides access to Federal tax credits to incentivize rehabilitation
projects. Because the HDC is a CLG, they are part of the review and coordination
process for National Register nominations in the County.
Section 106 review occurs when any Federal or State funding or permitting is
involved in a project that affects a National Register resource or a resource eligible for
the National Register. In many cases properties identifled on the MIHP may trigger at
least an initial review for Section 106. Any project which has the potential to trigger
this review should contact the Maryland Historical Trust (MHT) prior to application at
the County to ensure the Section 106 process has been initiated. This opens up a
consultation with Federal, State and local government (HDC), as well as the public,
about views and concerns for the project. The review usually results in agreements
and plans to mitigate the impacts on historic resources.
4 Historic Structures
HDC Reviews
Historic Rural Villages (Historic Communities)
The County’s unincorporated Rural Villages are often strongly related to industry,
transportation or migration. The County has a zoning classiflcation of Rural Village; but, it is
important to note that Historic Rural Villages do not always coincide with this zoning
designation. Once an Historic Rural Village is surveyed by MHT or the County, the individual
resources identifled would henceforth have to undergo review by the HDC if any exterior
changes are to be made.
Those properties individually listed on the MIHP within the Rural Village Zoning designation
would also have HDC review of applications. Lastly, new construction in County surveyed
Historic Rural Villages which have been adopted would also be reviewed by the HDC.
Map of the Historic Rural Villages and Antietam Overlay Areas
View Interactive Mapping
Design Guidelines 5
Antietam Overlay
The protection of scenic vistas, especially those associated with small towns and villages, is
important to historic resource protection. Deteriorated vistas can detract from the context of
historic resources and also reduce the goal of immersion that heritage tourism strives to
achieve. Washington County has numerous examples of historic and cultural landscapes, such
as the Rural Villages. Currently, the County has adopted only one land management regulation
speciflcally targeted at preserving the context of the Antietam National Battlefleld. The
Antietam Overlay zoning district protects viewsheds around the Antietam National Battlefleld
and its approaches with additional levels of review.
There are three distinct subareas that are deflned in the Antietam Overlay
zoning district. Overlay Area 1 (AO1) encompasses the Battlefleld proper and a buffer
surrounding the Federally owned land. In this area, the exterior appearance of all uses are
subject to HDC review. Overlay Area 2 (AO2) consists of the approach areas to the Battlefleld
along major transportation corridors. The AO2 area requires applications involving the
exterior appearance of all commercial and non-residential uses, excluding farm structures, to
include HDC review. The flnal area, Overlay Area 3 (AO3), pertains to the Red Hill middle
ground viewshed from the Battlefleld. This area was designated with assistance from the
National Park Service via a technical study entitled “Analysis of the Visible Landscape:
Antietam” published in April 1988. Regulations in this area limit the amount of tree cutting
allowed on speciflc areas of Red Hill. Applications in the AO3 area, unless individually listed on
the MIHP, are not reviewed by the HDC.
Antietam Battlefleld, WA-II-477
6 Historic Structures
Historic Preservation Overlay
The purpose of the Historic Preservation zoning overlay district is to provide a mechanism for
the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of historic and cultural resources. It is
an overlay zone meant to enhance, not substitute, for the existing zoning designation, that
regulates land use. The presence of the overlay on a property indicates there is a historic or
cultural resource that has signiflcance to the heritage of Washington County. This overlay must
be in place on a property to be eligible for County tax credits. Once in place, the HP Overlay
provides continued opportunities for County tax credits as well as providing review authority
for new construction or modiflcation of existing structures’ exteriors on the property. The HDC
reviews all applications for the HP Overlay and any applications containing HP Overlay. There
are currently more than 40 HP overlay areas within the County. The intention of the Overlay, as
listed in the zoning ordinance, is as follows:
• Safeguard the heritage of Washington County as embodied and refiected in such
structures, sites and districts;
• Stabilize and improve property values of such structures, sites, and districts and in
Washington County generally;
• Foster civic pride in the beauty and noble accomplishments of the past;
• Strengthen the economy of the County; and
• Promote the preservation and appreciation of historic structures, sites and districts for the
education and welfare of the residents of Washington County.
Tax Credits
One of Washington County’s main tools used to promote historic preservation since 1990 is
the tax credits for the restoration and rehabilitation of exteriors on historic structures. These
credits are applied for prior to work starting, to determine if the property is in the HP Overlay
or Antietam Overlay 1 or 2 zoning areas. If the property is not in an existing area the HP
Overlay must be applied prior to application for the tax credit. This overlay is added through
the rezoning process. Once the property is in an eligible area, credits of up to 10% of the total
amount spent on preservation are available from the County if the owner follows the Secretary
of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. The HDC reviews applications
for the tax credits to determine what work qualifles. The owner can also apply for State and
Federal tax credits up to 20% through the Maryland Historical Trust, which is a separate
application process.
Additional Tax Credit
Resources
Secretary of Interior Standards
for the Treatment of Historic
Properties
MHT Tax Credits
County Tax Credit Resources
County Tax Credit Ordinance
County Tax Credit Application
Design Guidelines 7
Antietam Iron Works Bridge (SHA W5731), WA-II-033
Map of the Historic Preservation (HP) Zoning Overlays
View Interactive Mapping
8 Historic Structures
Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties
The primary repository for resource identiflcation and documentation is the Maryland
Inventory of Historic Properties (MIHP). The Inventory was created by the Maryland Historical
Trust (MHT) shortly after its creation in 1961. The inventory includes the nationally listed
resources mentioned previously as well as those added by State and local efforts. The County,
with grant assistance from the State, has been adding resources to the MIHP since the
1970’s. The County currently does not maintain its own inventory of historic or cultural
resources. The properties fall into the categories of Buildings, Districts, Objects, Sites or
Structures. The HDC reviews impacts to all resource categories listed but primarily reviews
permits and plans affecting buildings on the Inventory.
What’s Historic?
Historic resources have factors which are used to evaluate and prioritize them. Typically, to be
included on the National Register, a resource must be at least 50 years old. Age of the
resource is simply one component to be considered.
Significance
Resources can have local, state or national signiflcance. Typically, there is a period of
signiflcance which can be anywhere from a thousand years to a few days depending on
the events the resource may be associated with. Signiflcance is the importance of a property to
the history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture of a community. Signiflcance is
achieved by association with a set of criteria:
Criteria A That are associated with events that have made a signiflcant contribution
to the broad patterns of our history; or
Criteria B That are associated with the lives of signiflcant persons in our past; or
Criteria C
That embody the distinctive characteristics 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 signiflcant and distinguishable en-
tity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
Criteria D That have yielded or may be likely to yield information important in histo-
ry or pre-history.
Design Guidelines 9
Integrity
Integrity relates to the ability of the resource to convey its historical associations or
attributes. Integrity is measured by how closely the location, setting, design, materials and
workmanship, feeling and association remain intact for the resource.
Location
Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the
place where the historic event occurred.
Setting
Setting is the physical environment of an historic property. It refers to the
historic character of the place in which the property played its historical
role. It involves how, not just where, the property is situated and its
historical relationship to surrounding features and open space.
Design
Design is the combination of elements that create the historic form, plan,
space, structure, and style of a property. This includes such elements as:
organization of space, proportion, scale, technology, ornamentation, and
materials.
Materials
Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited
during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or
conflguration to form an historic property.
Workmanship
Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture
or people during any given period in history.
Feeling
Feeling is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a
particular period of time.
Association
Association is the direct link between an important historic event or
person and an historic property.
Sign, Rufus Wilson Store, WA-V-074
10 Historic Structures
These guidelines will provide assurance to property owners that their application review will be
based on clear and consistent standards. These guidelines are also designed to be fiexible
and interpreted to accommodate each request as it is measured against the unique
circumstances of each application, existing historic structures, and the proposed activities.
In the event of a confiict between state laws and the County’s ordinances and policies or these
Design Guidelines, the HDC will consult with the County Attorney’s Oiffce.
Application Requirements
The HDC makes prompt and proper decisions to issue a Certiflcate of Appropriateness or
comments in support or not in support of applications when it has suiffcient information to
determine all aspects of a design proposal. The applicant bears the responsibility for ensuring
that all applications are complete and on time.
The following information is determined to be the minimum acceptable to accompany an
application for review by the HDC.
1. Scale drawings and pictures of the existing buildings showing their current condition. *All
photographs must be in color and have excellent clarity; digital format is preferred.
2. A scale drawing of the proposed changes to the existing building or the new construction,
showing all affected sides of the structure. The drawings should identify all new materials
and show the actual design of a treatment rather than descriptions in words alone.
Dimensions should be provided.
3. A scale drawing of the property showing the location of the existing buildings on the site
and the location of the building additions or new construction. The relationship to public
road and other points of access shall also be shown. The relationship of other buildings in
the same or adjacent historic districts should be shown.
4. Suiffcient information to determine the appearance of new exterior materials either in the
form of manufacturer’s publications or samples. Photographs are especially helpful.
The Historic District Commission hosts a public meeting on the flrst Wednesday
of each month. Applicants must submit their detailed application at least ten
(10) business days before the meeting to be included on the agenda.
Design Guidelines 11
5. See demolition section for additional application requirements speciflc to that application
type.
Applications that require HDC reviews resulting in a Certiflcate of Appropriateness that are
approved, approved with conditions or disapproved include:
1. Design review for construction within a Historic Rural Village or Antietam Overlay
2. Design review for construction within a Historic Preservation District
3. Demolition permit review for all structures within a Historic Preservation District or
contributing structures within the Antietam Overlay
4. Determination for the issuance of County property tax credits for properties in the Historic
Preservation District, Antietam Overlay, or National Register District within a municipality
with a Historic District Commission
Applications that require HDC reviews resulting in comments in support or not in support for
the application include:
1. Design review for construction within a Rural Village zoning designation for a property
containing resources on the MIHP
2. Demolition permit applications for structures identifled on the Maryland Inventory of
Historic Properties that are outside the review areas listed above
3. Zoning text, zoning map amendments, special exceptions and variances, site plans, cell
towers, and subdivision applications that affect historic structures or zones
The HDC does not review permit applications for construction under 100 sq ft in the Antietam
Overlay or Rural Village zoning designations. Agricultural building permits also are not
reviewed in those areas. The HDC does not review applications for interior changes but will
provide consultation if requested. The information listed above is speciflc to the application
review of the Historic District Commission. Additional submittal requirements may be
necessary. Applicants should contact the Division of Permits and Inspections to determine
those requirements. All applications, excluding Historic Preservation Tax Credit, are currently
made through the Division of Permits and Inspections.
Did you remember?
Check for State or Feder-
al Funding/Permitting
and apply to MHT if
needed
Check for MIHP or HDC
Review Area Information
Check building permit or
plan requirements
Check additional HDC
application requirements
based on review type
Review the Design
Guidelines for the work
proposed
12 Historic Structures
Evaluation Process
The Commission shall consider only exterior features of a structure that would affect the
historic, archeological, or architectural signiflcance of the site or structure, any portion of which
is visible or intended to be visible from a public way. It does not consider any interior
arrangements, although interior changes may still be subject to building permit procedures.
The Commission renders a decision on a completed application within 45 days of receipt of
the completed application. Failure to act within the specifled time period shall be considered
an approval of the application by the Commission. The 45-day review period may be extended
upon agreement by the Commission and the applicant.
1. The application shall be approved by the Commission if it is consistent with the following
criteria:
A. The proposal does not substantially alter the exterior features of the structure.
B. The proposal is compatible in character and nature with the historical, cultural,
architectural, or archeological features of the site, structure, or district and would not be
detrimental to achievement of the purposes of Article 20 of the County Zoning
Ordinance.
C. The proposal would enhance or aid in the protection, preservation and public or private
utilization of the site or structure, in a manner compatible with its historical,
archeological, architectural, or cultural value.
D. The proposal is necessary so that unsafe conditions or health hazards are remedied.
E. The "Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings" and subsequent revisions are to be used as guidance
only and are not to be considered mandatory.
2. In reviewing the plans for any such construction or change, the Commission shall give
consideration to and not disapprove an application except with respect to the factors
specifled below.
1. The historic or architectural value and signiflcance of the site or structure and its
relationship to the historic or architectural value and signiflcance of the surrounding
area.
2. The relationship of the exterior architectural features of the structure to the remainder of
the structure and to the surrounding area.
Design Guidelines 13
3. The general compatibility of exterior design, scale, proportion, arrangement, texture,
and materials proposed to be used.
4. Any other factors, including aesthetic factors, that the Commission deems to be
pertinent.
3. The Commission shall be strict in its judgment of plans for those structures, sites, or districts
deemed to be valuable according to studies performed for districts of historic or
architectural value. The Commission shall be lenient in its judgment of plans involving new
construction, unless such plans would seriously impair the historic or architectural value of
surrounding structures.
For Rural Villages, additional review criteria for applications are listed in Section 5D.5
Architectural Review of the Zoning Ordinance and include:
1. The exterior appearance of existing structures in the Rural Village, including materials,
style, arrangement of doors and windows, mass, height and number of stories, roof style
and pitch, proportion.
2. Building Size and Orientation
3. Landscaping
4. Signage
5. Lighting
6. Setbacks
7. Accessory structures
Click to View Document
14 Historic Structures
Demolition
Washington County encourages the retention of signiflcant buildings, structures, sites, objects,
or other historic resources within the County. Given the irreversible nature of demolition, full
deliberation of all alternatives before action is essential.
Additional Resources:
Preservation Brief #31— Mothballing of Historical Buildings
Demolition Permit Evaluation
In considering a request for a Certiflcate of Appropriateness or comment to demolish a
structure, the Commission will weigh the criteria listed in the Evaluation Process previously
discussed.
Demolition Permit Review
Demolition review is a legal tool that provides the Historic District Commission with the means
to ensure that potentially signiflcant buildings and structures are not demolished without
notice and review. This process creates a safety net for historic resources to ensure that
buildings and structures worthy of preservation are not inadvertently demolished.
Demolition review does not always prevent the demolition of historically signiflcant buildings
or structures. Rather, as the name suggests, it allows for review of applications for demolition
permits for a speciflc period to assess a building’s historical signiflcance.
If the applicant or the HDC requests additional guidance regarding the property to determine
signiflcance or documentation status, the Maryland Historical Trust may be contacted to assess
a to-be-demolished structure. The Maryland Historical Trust does not have a formal role in
regulating or reviewing local demolitions but will act as a technical resource if needed.
Failure to Comply or Willful Disregard
Failure to comply or disregarding these policies will result in applicable flnes being
administered.
The Historic District Commission will review demolition permits for structures
400 square feet or greater or if partial demolition is proposed in coordination
with new construction or additions. Reviewable structures are on the Maryland
Inventory of Historic Properties (MIHP), within the Historic Preservation Zoning
Overlay, Antietam Overlay 1 or 2 or are greater than 50 years old in a Historic
Rural Village.
Design Guidelines 15
Demolition Permit Application Requirements
The following demolition permit application requirements are in addition to the Application
Requirements listed previously for the Historic District Commission. Demolition permits that
involve multiple structures, such as a farmstead or site, should include documentation that will
enable full review of all involved structures.
The demolition permit number, provided after permit application with Division of Permits and
Inspections, must accompany the demolition application materials listed below. Materials for
HDC review may be submitted digitally to the Department of Planning & Zoning at
askplanning@washco-md.net once the permit application has been flled. Applicants may be
required to provide additional materials to other reviewing agencies.
A. Written description and history of the building or structure to be demolished.
B. Detailed drawings, such as construction or trim details.
C. Floor plan for each fioor level, drawn to approximate scale or fully dimensioned.
D. Applicant’s plan for the recycling of waste generated.
E. A report analyzing the demolition alternatives and mitigation (listed in descending order of
preference) as to their feasibility. The report shall consist of thorough, deliberative analyses
of each of the alternatives, explaining why each alternative is or is not feasible. Additional
photographs should be provided in support of the analysis. In cases where a permit may
involve multiple structures, each structure must have its alternatives documented.
F. A site plan illustrating any proposed development or introduction of plantings following
demolition (if applicable).
The HDC highly encourages the early review and involvement of the Maryland Historical Trust
(MHT), using their Project Review Form. The instances where MHT should be consulted include
buildings, sites, and projects that involve State or Federal funding or may require state or
federal permits; for example, a state highways entrance permit. This review will ensure that the
Section 106 process, if needed, is at least started before the HDC reviews a demolition permit.
This process allows for greater consulting party input.
The HDC may request additional information from the applicant following the review and
discussion of the application. Additional information ensures that the structure has been fully
documented before a Certiflcate of Appropriateness or support of a demolition permit occurs.
This documentation could include supporting documents from licensed professionals such as
an architect, engineer, or restoration specialists.
Demolition Alternatives
Redesigning the project to avoid
any impact to the structure or its
setting;
Incorporating the structures into
the overall design of the project;
Converting the structure into an-
other use (adaptive reuse);
Relocating the structure on the
property;
Relocating the structure to anoth-
er property;
Demolition Mitigation
Salvaging from the structure his-
torically signiflcant architectural
features and building materials;
Documenting the structure as a
whole and its individual architec-
tural features in photographs,
drawings, and/or text. This docu-
mentation should follow the
Standards and Guidelines for
Architectural and Historical Inves-
tigations in Maryland and be
completed by a professional as
listed in those Standards. Preferred Less Preferred
16 Historic Structures
Not in Support
If HDC is not in support of the
permit, the permit and all review
information will be forwarded to
the Planning Commission to be
scheduled at their next available
meeting date for their determina-
tion of support. Planning Com-
mission may provide additional
alternatives to the applicant that
are available from the subdivision
or site plan perspective to mini-
mize impacts to historic re-
sources.
HDC Meeting Process
for demo (HDC and Ap-
HDC discusses provided applica-
tion information and any quali-
fled professional documentation
with the applicant. Demolition
alternative information will be
reviewed extensively. Note: No
public comment is taken. This is
HDC Recommendation
HDC will make motion in support
or not in support of the demoli-
tion permit.
Support
If the HDC supports the demoli-
tion permit, a letter stating sup-
port will be attached to the appli-
cation with reasoning and the
application will need no further
HDC review.
Review Process for demo
(HDC)
Complete demolition permit ap-
plications will be distributed for
review by the HDC at next meet-
ing date. Permit is shared with
additional interested historic
partnerships for comment. If MHT
Project Review is applicable re-
view will not be scheduled until
MHT initial review is complete.
Initial Process for demo
(Applicant)
Open Maryland Historical Trust
(MHT) Project Review if applica-
ble
Consider demolition alternatives
and gather documentation which
supports those alternatives’ feasi-
bility
Apply for demolition permit with
Division of Permits and Inspec-
tions AFTER any applicable Site
Plan, Grading or Subdivision re-
view is completed.
Supply HDC general required
documents and demolition per-
mit speciflc required documents
to HDC Staff at time of demoli-
tion permit application.
Design Guidelines 17
Ordinary Maintenance
Routine or ordinary maintenance is deflned as work that does not alter the exterior features of
a Historic Site or contributing structure.
Maintenance of all structures, historic or otherwise, is strongly encouraged. Routine
maintenance of buildings in the historic preservation zone, rural villages, or properties listed
on the Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties may not require review or approval by the
Historic District Commission, a Certiflcate of Appropriateness, or a building permit. However, it
is strongly recommended that the customer reach out to the Historic District Commission prior
to starting work if there are questions regarding a project on a historic structure. The Historic
District Commission is a resource for proper treatments and can assist in determining if the
changes are within the scope of ordinary maintenance. Ordinary or routine maintenance is
work that does not alter the exterior features of a Historic Site or contributing structure. Key
exterior features, including roof materials, doors, windows, moldings, are discussed later in
detail in these guidelines.
Ordinary maintenance can include activities to prevent or correct deterioration, decay. or
damage to a structure or any part thereof as long as repairs or replacement are of like material
and design. Nothing in these guidelines shall be construed to prevent ordinary maintenance
or repair that does not involve a change of design, material, or of the outward appearance of a
building.
Because ordinary maintenance is not considered new construction, the cost associated with
maintenance work is not eligible for tax credits.
Additional Resources:
Preservation Brief #3— Improving Energy Eiffciency in Historic Buildings
Preservation Brief #39—Holding the Line: Controlling Unwanted Moisture in Historic Buildings
Preservation Brief #47—Maintaining the Exterior of Small and Medium Size Historic Buildings
18 Historic Structures
A Short History of Washington County
The flrst European settlers who arrived in Lord Baltimore’s colony of Maryland in 1634 were
mostly English Catholics. It took another 100 years before the flrst land patent was issued in
what is now Washington County. While some of those applying for the earliest patents in our
county were of English descent, it was the German Protestants emigrating south out of
Pennsylvania who would have the greatest impact on the landscape and architecture. Settlers
such as Jonathan Hager, Hagerstown’s namesake, and other skilled Germans decidedly had
the largest impact of transforming a wilderness landscape into neat, productive plantations
and towns. The architecture in both their homes and agricultural buildings refiects their Dutch,
German, Swiss, Italian, Bohemian, and English heritage. With the farming of vast acreages,
surviving outbuildings and deed references provide evidence that large landowners in the
County owned slaves or indentured servants to tend to their land. As a result, there are
examples of institutional buildings such as schools to support the African American community
as well as vernacular structures which were later homes to the freed.
As the transportation routes of the rivers, canals, and roads to the area improved, an even
larger mix of ethnic groups came to the area. The legacy of these settlers and their
descendants is a diverse accumulation of architectural styles and construction methods that
make Washington County a unique and special place. The German’s fondness for usage of
the most readily available building material, native limestone, is refiected in the stone houses,
barns, and bridges that are still evident in our community. Surviving also, are the English brick
and log structures. Along the National Road and the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, many high-
style, large, brick and frame buildings appeared, refiecting the flnancial prosperity there.
Other humbler structures were built elsewhere, representing the more common agricultural
settlements. Fortunately, many of the older buildings of our early days remain. The purpose of
these Guidelines is to assist those who wish to preserve and restore these deflning aspects of
our culture.
Design Guidelines 19
Sunshine Hill, WA-VI--013
Old Forge Farm, Surveyor’s Last Shift, WA-I-054 Valentia, WA-I-231
Stone Hill, WA-II-403
Photo Credit (All Photos): WCHT
This page is intentionally left blank
Design Guidelines 21
Whether magniflcently restored or lovingly
maintained, the historic properties that dot
Washington County’s rural roads and rolling
hills are flne adornments in the rich tapestry
comprising Maryland’s diverse history.
Washington County contains examples of a
wide variety of 18th, 19th, and early 20th
century residential and commercial
architecture, including Federal, Greek
Revival, Italianate, Second Empire, Queen
Anne, Colonial Revival, and Neoclassical
Revival styles.
Very rarely are buildings academic, textbook
examples of their particular style; rather most
are vernacular interpretations of high-style
architecture. The original design includes
numerous modiflcations. Through their
decorative detailing, these vernacular
buildings refiect the infiuences of popular
styles.
The character-deflning elements that deflne a
building’s style are particularly important to
preserve and should receive special
consideration in planning for maintenance or
rehabilitation. The following descriptions
and illustrations provide an introduction to
the historical background and distinguishing
features of the architectural styles commonly
represented throughout Washington County.
Architectural Styles of Washington County
Keewaydin, Mt. Angelwood, WA-IV-089 Photo Credit: WCHT
22 Historic Structures
The term vernacular (or folk) architecture generally refers to buildings not planned by an
architect but based upon regional traditions, the materials at hand, and some expedience.
Vernacular Forms 18th—19th Century
The earliest houses in Washington County do not flt easily into any particular category, but
they can be grouped by several identifying features that refiect the changes in 18th and 19th
century rural domestic architecture.
Character Defining Elements
1730 to 1760
• Stone, log, or log-encased clapboard
over a rough-stone foundation
• Constructed over a spring
• 1 to 1 ½ or 2 stories
• Steeply pitched roofs
• Large central chimneys
• Very small window openings
• Batten doors
• Puncheon logs and rocks as insulation
between the basement and flrst fioor
1760 to 1790
• Stone, log, or log-encased clapboard
over a stone foundation
• Usually 2 stories
• Jack arches over windows
• Gable-end chimneys
• More reflned cut stones, quoined corners
• Mid-century structures refiect a variety of
styles, dependent on the ethnicity of the
builder
Kammerer House, WA-I-013 David’s Friendship, WA-I-388
Design Guidelines 23
1790 to 1820
• Stone, brick, clapboard
• One to two stories
• Often with two front doors
• Segmented arches above windows
• Gable-end chimneys
1820 to 1860
• Stone, brick, clapboard
• One to two stories
• Plain lintel above windows
Scratch Ankle Farm, WA-II-084 Brightwood, WA-I-216
Photo Credits: WCHT and Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties
(MIHP), Maryland Historical Trust
24 Historic Structures
Georgian – 1720 to 1840
Georgian architecture developed in England out of the Classical Revival which dominated
Europe during the Renaissance and Enlightenment. The Georgian style’s name comes from
the successive rulers of Great Britain, King George I through King George IV, who ruled
England while Georgian architecture was popular. Georgian architecture became unpopular in
the United States at the time of the Revolutionary War as American architects wished to
separate their style from British infiuence.
• Simple 1-2 story box, 2 rooms deep, using strict symmetrical arrangements
• Panel front door centered, topped with rectangular windows (in door or as a transom) and
capped with an elaborate crown/entablature supported by decorative pilasters
• Cornice embellished with decorative moldings, usually dentil work
• Multi-pane windows are never paired, and fenestrations are arranged symmetrically
(whether vertical or horizontal), usually 5 across
• Roof: 40% are side gabled; 25% gambrel; 25% hipped
• Chimneys on both sides of the home
• A portico in the middle of the roof with a window in the middle is more common with post-
Georgian styles
• Small 6-paned sash windows and/or dormer windows in the upper fioors, primarily used for
servants’ quarters.
• Larger windows with 9 or 12 panes on the main fioors
Design Guidelines 25
Daniel Donnelly House, WA-II-417
Photo Credit: Paula Stoner Dickey, MIHP
Ditto Knolls, WA-II-093
Photo Credit: WCHT
Hitt-Cost House, WA-II-252
Photo Credit: WCHT
26 Historic Structures
Federal – 1780 to 1840
Houses of the Federal period, constructed
during the flrst years of the new republic,
retained the general form of their Georgian
predecessors, but were characterized by
more delicate decorative detailing that often
incorporated elements derived from early
Greek and Roman design.
• Fanlight over door (almost always
rounded, rarely squared), sidelights
• Classical/Greek detailing of entryway,
Palladian windows, balustrades, oval/
circular
• Rooms in some high-style examples
• Fenestration is symmetrical as Georgian
style.
• Double-hung sash windows for flrst time
(Georgian also) Woburn Manor, WA-II-458
Ferry Hill, WA-II-035 Rose Hill, WA-I-374
Photo Credits: WCHT
Design Guidelines 27
Greek Revival – circa
1830 to 1860
The Greek Revival style spread rapidly across
America between 1830 and 1850. Two
factors helped increase the style’s popularity.
Archaeological excavations during this
period increased public awareness of ancient
Greece, and citizens of the new American
republic sympathized with modern Greece’s
involvement in its war for independence
(1821-30).
• Low-pitched gable, hipped or shed roof;
gable may face front
• Portico or recessed entrance; pilasters,
square posts, or classical columns
• Entrance with transom and sidelights
• Broad frieze below cornice, sometimes
with rectangular attic windows
• Trim incorporates geometrical forms,
“bull’s eye” and foliated motifs Plumb Grove Mansion, WA-V-015
28 Historic Structures
Italianate/Italian
Villa – circa 1830 to
1880
The Italianate style developed as part of the
Picturesque movement which was a reaction
against classical formality. The style has two
basic forms. Italianate buildings based on
Renaissance models are rectangular in plan
with symmetrical façades, whereas the
“Italian Village” type is based on the designs
of rural farmhouses in Italy and are
characterized by an asymmetrical L-shaped
or T-shaped fioor plan with a tall tower.
• Low-pitched gable or hipped roof
(attached buildings may have shed roofs)
• Eave cornice with decorative brackets
• Walls are given a smooth flnish; flnely
coursed brickwork with narrow mortar
joints is typical; cut stone and stucco were
also used
• Enriched detailing such as string courses
and quoins
• Tall, narrow windows, often with round-
arched heads
• Windows may have elaborate frames,
hoods, bracketed lintels, or pediments
• Porch or arcade may span the façade, or a
small portico may deflne the entrance
Streetscape in Williamsport, WA-WIL-025, WA-WIL-026 & WA-WIL-027
Design Guidelines 29
Second Empire – circa
1860 to 1890
The Second Empire style is most readily
recognized by the characteristic mansard
roof; a hipped roof of double pitch. The
lower slopes of the roof, just above the
building walls, are steeply pitched to create a
usable upper story lighted by dormer
windows. This roof form is named for the
17th-century French architect François
Mansart. The style became popular in France
during the Second Empire (1852-70) and
spread to the United States in the 1860’s.
• Generally symmetrical, rectangular in plan
and 2 ½ stories high
• May have a projecting entrance mansard
roof, usually covered in slate; sometimes
slates of various shapes and colors are
used to create intricate patterns
• Lower slopes of roof may be straight,
convex, or concave; windows may be
topped with semicircular or segmental
arches and often have bold molded
heads
Rufus Wilson Complex, WA-V-074
30 Historic Structures
Queen Anne and
other Victorian
Styles – circa 1880-
1910
The Queen Anne style is derived from
medieval English architectural forms.
• Asymmetrical plan and massing
• Variety of surface treatments, textures,
and colors
• Elaborate decorative trim, shingles and
brickwork
• Irregular roof line with multiple steep
gables
• Conical-roofed tower at corner
• Façade may have various projecting bays
• Row houses often have second-story oriel
windows
• Porch may span façade, sometimes wraps
around corner of building
• Double-hung windows often have
multiple small lights in upper sash;
sometimes forming a border around a
single large pane. These small lights may
be either clear or include colored stained-
glass windows and transoms
Eby House, WA-I-328
Design Guidelines 31
Colonial Revival – circa 1876-1920
The American Centennial of 1876 prompted a revival of interest in the nation’s heritage. As a
result, architects began to study the building forms and detailing of the Colonial period. The
return to these historical precedents was partly a reaction against the unrestrained exuberance
that characterized Victorian era design. Colonial Revival buildings often combine turn-of-the-
century building forms with decorative elements derived from 18th-century architecture. This
detailing is often over-scaled and sometimes incorporates features of the Queen Anne style,
whose period of popularity overlapped that of the Colonial Revival.
• Generally symmetrical façade, 2 or 2-1/2 story height
• Gabled, hipped or gambrel roof form
• Masonry or frame construction
• Brick may be laid in Flemish bond pattern
• Frame buildings covered with wood siding in bevel proflle, or with wood shingles
• Multi-pane sash windows
• Porches may have heavy tapered columns and balustrades with square or turned balusters
• Entrance located in the center of the façade, with transom and sidelights
Classical Revival – circa 1900-1920
Developed in America in the flrst quarter of the 20th century, this style was popular for public
and commercial buildings; its monumentality was frequently used in the construction of bank
buildings. The Neoclassical Revival employed features from Greek antiquity such as Ionic and
Corinthian columns and pedimented porticoes to embellish balanced, regular compositions.
Wall surfaces were smooth and often were flnished in flne materials such as marble.
• Classical Greek and Roman architectural elements: columns, round arches, heavy
entablatures, often with elaborate detail
• Symmetry in plans, use of wings or corner pavilions
• Used for government and civic buildings; common for banks
WA-II-385, Shepherdstown Pike,
Sharpsburg
WA-HAN-055, West Main St., Hancock
32 Historic Structures
Twentieth Century 1900-1950
The modern styles of architecture are a result of America’s efforts to design inexpensive
housing that was eye-pleasing and functional, but could be built quickly to keep up with the
fast-paced effects of the industrial revolution. Builders stopped constructing elaborate
Victorian styles in favor of homes that were compact, economical, and informal.
A predominant architectural style of Washington County in the 20th century, the American
Foursquare, is known by a variety of terms. These include box house, a cube, a double cube,
or a square type American house. The style flrst appeared about 1890 and remained popular
well into the 1930s. The American Foursquare lent itself to endless variations and flnish details
by individual buyers.
Bungalows, often associated with the Craftsman Style, are characteristically smaller houses.
These structures were predominantly built after 1905. Construction of the style began in
California, the state where the architects most associated with the Craftsman style, Greene and
Green, were based. This style of house was frequently found in pattern books for purchase.
Some were even offered as complete packages including materials to be built on site.
Ranch style houses, also known as the American ranch, California ranch, rambler, or rancher, is
another of the domestic architectural styles that has now aged suiffciently to have become of
interest. First built in the 1920s, the ranch style was extremely popular among the booming
post-war middle class of the 1940s to 1970s. The ranch house is noted for its long, close-to-
the-ground proflle, and minimal use of exterior and interior decoration.
Design Guidelines 33
Foursquare
• Simple fioor plan
• Boxy, cubic shape
• Full width front porch with columnar
supports and wide stairs
• Offset front entry in an otherwise
symmetrical façade
• 2 to 2 ½ stories
• Pyramidal, hipped roof, often with
wide eaves
• Large central dormer
• Large single light windows in front,
otherwise double hung
• Incorporated design elements from
other contemporaneous styles, but
usually in simple applications
Bungalow
• Low-pitched, gabled roof (front, side
or cross gabled roof)
• Wide overhanging eaves
• Exposed rafters under eaves
• Decorative brackets (knee braces or
corbels)
• Front corner porches under roofiine
• Tapered or squared columns
supporting roof or porch
• 4 over 1 or 6 over 1 sash windows
• Hand-crafted stone or woodwork
Ranch Style
• Single story
• Horizontal, rambling layout: long,
narrow and low to the ground
• Rectangular, L-shaped or U-shaped
design
• Open fioor plans
• Low pitched roofiines with wide
eaves, often hipped or gabled
• Attached garage or carports
• Large windows and sliding glass
doors
Maugansville, WA-I-804 Bungalow, 1400 Block of Sharpsburg
Pike, Hagerstown Ranch, Benny Drive, Hagerstown
34 Historic Structures
Mill Complexes
Washington County has a rich history in agriculture and forestry. These industries required
local mills to process timber and grain products into commodities for locals. Many larger
creeks in the County, such as Beaver Creek and Antietam Creek, provided the water power
necessary for locals to construct the dams, races, and sluice boxes that ensured those waters
were harnessed effectively. There are mills scattered along waterways throughout the County.
Early mills were of log construction. Remaining mills are predominantly limestone construction.
The mills contain additional features such as water wheels and milling machinery including
millstones. Support buildings associated with storage of the raw or processed materials are
common. The homes of the operators or owners are also part of the complex. Communities
frequently sprang up directly adjacent to these complexes. Many mills are associated with early
large landowners of the County. There are approximately 50 sites associated with mills on the
Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties in the County.
• Masonry exterior
• 2-4 stories
• Built into the bank of water source
• Rectangular shape for Mill
• Gable roof
• Wood shingle or metal roof
• Windows along all facades of varying fenestration
• Support buildings
• Stream engineering including races, sluices and dams
Design Guidelines 35
Doub’s Mill; Newcomer’s Mill, WA-II-090
Photo Credit: WCHT
Rose’s Mill, Pleasant Grove Mills, WA-I-413
36 Historic Structures
Common Accessory Structures—Pre 1930
Many structures within the County are part of a complex of buildings, all of which contribute to
the history of the County and site. These structures create a historic landscape. They are often
of similar construction to the main structure on the property, but they could have been built
before or after the main structure depending on the development of the complex.
Bank Barn
These 2-story structures are built into a hill or bank with the lower level being equipped for
housing animals while the upper levels are used for storage. The second fioor is often
extended, or cantilevered, over the flrst providing shelter for animals. Columns or posts may
support the overhangs. Barns can be constructed of masonry or wood. The narrow-end side
walls are frequently brick or stone with openings for ventilation. The openings form a
decorative pattern. In some cases the barn may include distinctive paint colors such as red or
white. Sign painters used the large exterior wall spaces for design advertisements. Cupolas
and weather vanes are often present in varying number and conflgurations.
Spring House
These structures are typically single story or two story masonry construction. They are varying
sizes in the County from small 1-room buildings to larger multi room buildings. They were built
over a spring on the farm complex and were used for the protection of the water source and
for refrigeration. Location of the house and barn in relation to the spring would be an
important component in the landscape of the complex. They were often distanced from animal
husbandry buildings to protect the water source.
Bank Barn at WA-II-286 Mong-Linger Farm, Spring House, WA-IV-004
Design Guidelines 37
Summer Kitchen
These single-story structures were usually built directly behind a main house in a building
complex. They were constructed of various materials including log and stone, but generally
had a large stone flreplace on the narrow-end side wall. They had 1 to 2 bays of windows with
a single entry door. Summer kitchens were for cooking and canning during the summer
months to keep the heat from the flreplace out of the main house. In some cases these
structures are now attached to the main structure of the complex through enclosure or
breezeways.
Smokehouse
These were typically single-story structures of masonry (stone or brick). Structures could also
be made from frame, log or a combination. Gabled roofs were predominant, but there are
examples of pyramidal roofs in the County. These were used for the preparation and
preservation of food. To contain the smoke being used for preservation, they would typically
have a single door with no chimney or windows . Hardware for hanging or laying meats to dry
may still be present in the structures. They were usually sited near the house and may have
been close to the summer kitchen.
Stone wall and Stone Fence - 1750-1850
Stone walls in the County are typically cut stone laid with mortar and topped with either
angular or fiat stone. These are prominent features around ecclesiastical sites. Often visible
from the right of way and adding to the rural landscape are stone fences, which are fleldstone,
typically fiat, laid without mortar. They are frequently found along property lines or dividing
pasture and croplands in the rural areas. Each of these are often several courses in height
making them at least 3 feet high.
Stone Fence along Dam #4 Rd, WA-II-275 Stone Walls at St Marks , WA-II-024
Summer Kitchen-Plumb Grove,
WA-V-015
Photo Credit: CSHA
Smokehouse, Oak Springs Farm,
WA-V-093
Photo Credit: CSHA
38 Historic Structures
Commercial Buildings – 1890 to 1930
Commercial buildings dating from 1890 to 1930 are distinguished by large windows arranged
in groups on their façades. Developed in Chicago in the 1890s, this style drew upon the
structural innovation of steel-frame construction, which enabled much larger window openings
than were possible with traditional bearing wall masonry. Beginning in the 1870s, molded,
glazed terra cotta became a popular substitute for carved stone. It was used extensively to
flnish commercial building façades in the early 20th century. Terra cotta was popular at this
time because it could be used to mimic much costlier stone such as marble and granite.
• Vertical emphasis, typically 2-4 stories in height
• Flat roofs
• Masonry wall surfaces
• Three-part windows or projecting bay windows
• Decorative cornices
• Steel and beam construction
• Ground fioor storefronts
Commercial Buildings – Post 1930
Art deco
• Sharp edge, linear appearance
• Smooth wall surface usually stucco
• Geometric forms, zigzags and chevrons or stylized motifs on the façade
• Low relief decorative panels
• Towers and vertical elements
• Strips of windows with decorative panels
• Stepped or set back front façade
• Fluting around doors and windows
Williamsport Barbershop, WA-WIL-020
Professional Arts Building
WA-HAG-057
Design Guidelines 39
Gas Stations—Post
1910
• Varied exterior materials including frame,
rusticated concrete block, and stucco
• Historicized roofs, matching borrowed
architectural style or fiat roofs with very
low slope
• Borrowed architectural styles to blend to
surrounding neighborhood
• Box-Type Stations, which can be in the Art
Moderne style
• Multi-use, structures that can include
convenience store, restaurants or car
repair garages attached
• Service bays
• Attached or detached canopies being fiat
or stylized
• Gas pumps that could be covered by
canopies directly adjacent to structure or
very close to a road right-of-way
• Signage indicating name or services
• Associated outbuildings (e.g., car washes,
garages, storage sheds)
Additional Resources
Preservation Brief #46—The Preservation and
Reuse of Historic Gas Stations
Himes General Store, Weverton Road, WA-III-031
Gas Station, Southeast corner of Wilson Blvd. and S. Potomac St., Hagerstown
40 Historic Structures
Beard’s Church, WA-I-056
Tolson’s Chapel, WA-II-202
Ecclesiastical
Architecture
Ecclesiastical architecture was dramatically
infiuenced by English architect James Barr’s
Anglican Church Architecture. It was flrst
published in 1842 and was dedicated to the
Oxford Society for Promoting the Study of
Gothic Architecture. A second edition
followed in 1843, and a third, in 1846 .
• Simple one storied, gable roofed
structures
• Masonry structure walls
• Gothic or Romanesque revival
architectural characteristics including
pointed arch windows, which may include
tracery and doors with transoms
• Single or double entrance doors
• Steeples, towers with bells
• Varied sash conflgurations but may
include decorative stained glass in
multiple bays
• Outbuildings, adjacent cemeteries, and
structures such as stone walls may
contribute to landscape and be similarly
styled
St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, WA-III-012
Manor Church of the Brethren, WA-II-
170
Design Guidelines 41
Schoolhouses
Early 20th century schoolhouses in
Washington County tended to be one room,
single-story structures. The exterior materials
of the school houses varied with wood, brick
and stone being common. The building
shape is usually rectangular or square and
often includes a gable end roof with
prominent front entrances. Several bays of
windows allowed adequate lighting of the
classroom. The buildings may also include a
bell or belfry top. There are many surviving
school houses in the County that have been
repurposed into uses such as community
buildings, museums, or commercial
businesses.
Historic Markers
Washington County is bordered on the north by one of the most famous boundaries in the
United States, the Mason-Dixon Line. Settling a property dispute between the Penns of
Pennsylvania and the Calverts of Maryland, these mile markers were decorated and placed at
one mile intervals along what is now the northern State Line of Maryland. These markers are
large blocks of limestone with engravings on each State’s side. The historical signiflcance of
these mile markers and the line they mark spans from colonial times through the Civil War.
The National Road, or Old National Pike as it’s also known, has historical markers along the
north side of its length. The State of Maryland owns the stones as they reside in the right-of-
way. The flrst stone was placed at the Baltimore Courthouse; they continue along the route
throughout the County at one mile intervals. These are much smaller than the Mason-Dixon
markers. They are engraved on the side facing the road indicating the distance to “B” or
Baltimore. These stones are also varying in their material. Some are limestone; some are
quartzite. These stones and other historic markers are often on the National Register and
should never be moved, stabilized, or otherwise altered without the express consent and
supervision of the Maryland Historical Trust.
Wilson School, WA-V-007
National Road Mile Marker, WA-II-728
Preservation Month 2022
1 Tax Credits
How effective do you feel tax credits are for the preservation of historic resources? Tax credits
are applied for before projects begin and are a credit granted on income or property tax after
work is completed. Washington County currently provides a 10% tax credit. Properties must
have the Historic Preservation Zoning Overlay applied or be within the Antietam Overlay 1 or
2 zoning overlay and contributing.
Not Effective Neutral Effective
2 Please provide any general comments on Tax Credits, which might assist the HDC in revising the program.
Please input 300 characters at most
3 Grants
How effective do you feel grants are for the preservation of historic resources? Grants are
applied for before projects begin and are money provided in advance of work completed to
assist in funding the project. Washington County does NOT currently have a grant program for
historic preservation.
Not Effective Neutral Effective
4 Please provide any general comments on Grants, which might assist the HDC in creating a program.
Please input 300 characters at most
5 Additional Incentives
Please provide any additional incentives for historic preservation that the HDC should explore
implementing.
Please input 300 characters at most
6 Additional Programs
The HDC would like to provide customers relevant free workshops on topics for historic
resource stewardship.
Plaster Restoration
Wood Exterior Repairs
Wood Window Preservation
Tax Credit/Grant Program Process and Application
Add Edit Appearance Options
Singleline text Multiline text
Single choice Single choice grid
Dropdown Multiple choice
Rating Likert scale
Ranking Number
Date Time
Date and time Signature
Image File upload
Address Map
Email Website
Note Group
Page
Save Preview Publish
The Historic District Commission (HDC) acknowledges the importance for the owners of
historic resources to have multiple tools to continue stewardship.
Preservation Month 2022 Overview Design Collaborate Analyze Data Settings
ArcGIS Survey123 My surveys Organization Help Meghan
Preservation Month 2022
The Historic District Commission (HDC) acknowledges the importance for the owners of
historic resources to have multiple tools to continue stewardship.
Tax Credits
How effective do you feel tax credits are for the preservation of historic resources? Tax credits
are applied for before projects begin and are a credit granted on income or property tax after
work is completed. Washington County currently provides a 10% tax credit. Properties must
have the Historic Preservation Zoning Overlay applied or be within the Antietam Overlay 1 or
2 zoning overlay and contributing.
Not Effective Neutral Effective
Please provide any general comments on Tax Credits, which might assist the HDC in revising the program.
Grants
How effective do you feel grants are for the preservation of historic resources? Grants are
applied for before projects begin and are money provided in advance of work completed to
assist in funding the project. Washington County does NOT currently have a grant program for
historic preservation.
Not Effective Neutral Effective
Please provide any general comments on Grants, which might assist the HDC in creating a program.
Additional Incentives
Please provide any additional incentives for historic preservation that the HDC should explore
implementing.
Tax Credit/Grant Program Process and Application
Wood Window Preservation
Wood Exterior Repairs
Plaster Restoration
Other
Additional Programs
The HDC would like to provide customers relevant free workshops on topics for historic
resource stewardship.
Submit
Visit the Department of Planning and Zoning | Historic District Commission
Week 1 | Post 1 (Tuesday)
The Washington County Commissioners presented a
proclamation to the Washington County Historic District
Commission to recognize May as Preservation Month.
Each week in May historic preservation themed content
will highlight the diverse and unique heritage of our
County.
Visit the Historic District Commission website:
https://www.washco-md.net/planning-zoning/historic-
district-commission/
(Proclamation and Presentation Pictures Included) Week 1 | Post 2 (Wednesday)
Week 1 | Post 3 (Friday)
Week 2 | Post 1 (Monday)
Week 2 | Post 2 (Wednesday)
Week 2 | Post 3 (Friday)
Week 3 | Post 1 (Monday)
Week 3 | Post 2 (Wednesday)
Week 3 | Post 3 (Friday)
Week 4 | Post 1 (Monday)
Week 4 | Post 2 (Wednesday)
Week 4 | Post 3 (Friday)
Week 5 | Wrap Up Post (Monday)
Saylor House Plaster class is posted for April 6 and April 25 for cross promotion
Saylor House: Plaster Wall Repairs and Finishing | Washington County Historical Trust
Be a part of saving building history and learn how to
repair your own plaster walls. Join the restoration team at the Saylor House in Kiwanis Park to learn how
to patch and finish lime plaster walls in an 1800’s stone house. The workshop brings participants into
the hands-on process of restoring historic lime plaster
kitchen walls of the Saylor House. The house will
serve as an educational site for lectures and workshops on the banks of Antietam Creek.
This workshop is a 3 day long course over each Friday
in May starting May 6th and ending May 20. It will run from 9am to 3pm.
For more information or to register visit the City of
Hagerstown Parks and Recreation(https://bit.ly/3NerTRA) or contact the
Washington County Historical Trust of Maryland (https://bit.ly/3twd5pP)
Photo Credit: Washington County Historical Trust of
Maryland Facebook Saylor House Brick in Stone Dust class is posted April 7 and April 29 for cross promotion
Saylor House: Laying Brick Floors in Stone Dust
Do your dreams involve a new or repaired brick patio
that you want to lay yourself? The Washington County
Historical Trust is hosting this workshop as part of the restoration of the Saylor House in Kiwanis Park.
The Saylor House was built around 1800 on the banks of the Antietam. The kitchen will serve as a classroom
and gathering place for activities associated with
historic buildings, historic building skills for repair and maintenance, environmental education and outdoor
recreation.
This workshop is a 3 day long course over each Saturday in May starting May 7th and ending May 21.
It will run from 9am to 3pm.
For more information or to register visit the City of Hagerstown Parks and Recreation
(https://bit.ly/3JxHgTf) or contact the Washington
County Historical Trust of Maryland (https://bit.ly/3twd5pP)
Photo Credit: Washington County Historical Trust of
Maryland Facebook
Record #Type MIHP#Record
Status
Folder Status Status Date Task Name Comments
Passed - Info 24-Feb-22 Historical Review Property contains MIHP listed property, however, it is not in an HDC review area and therefore does not
require approval. Forwarded no review contact letter to customer to introduce HDC/tax credits.
Days in Review:1
Folder Status Status Date Task Name Comments
Void 44631 Historical Review Reason for void: Structure under minimum sqft requiring permit (400) after measurement update
provided
Days in Review:2
Folder Status Status Date Task Name Comments
Passed - Info 15-Mar-22 Historical Review
Performed site visit 3/15 to determine status of the structure. Took photos of the porch area to be
demolished. Porch was removed as well as brick siding on that portion of the porch. Photo attached in
AA. HDC review would have only been for the demolition comment and there is no structure to comment
on at this point. Remainder of the house is intact and intended to connect to the 2 story addition to the
north. Passing on review MRJ
Days in Review:6
Folder Status Status Date Task Name Comments
Passed - Info 11-Mar-22 Historical Review Property contains MIHP but it is in the Town and the HDC has no jurisdiction for Boonsboro.
Days in Review:1
Folder Status Status Date Task Name Comments
Passed - Info 22-Mar-22 Historical Review HDC does not have review authority in Funkstown.
Days in Review:0
Activity Count:5
Void Total
1 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
1 5
Historic Review Activity 02/18/2022 thru 03/23/2022
Open Date Date Assigned Location Description Workflow Info
23-Feb-22 SI-18-006 19027
POFFENBERGER ROAD
648 SQ. FT. HEATED INGROUND SWIMMING
POOL WITH CONCRETE DECKING, 3-8 FEET IN
DEPTH
JAMES K. WEDDLE
2022-01105 Non-Residential
Demolition Permit III020; III140 Void 44626 44629 4425 MAIN
ROHRERSVILLE, MD 21779
TO DEMOLISH THE GARDEN SHED THAT WAS
BUILT IN THE MID 20TH CENTURY WITH
UNTREATED POSTS AND WITH A TRUCK BED
FLOOR. A REAR SECTION WAS ADDED AT SOME
POINT WITH UNTREATED POSTS AND AN
2022-00913 Residential New
Construction Permit I422 Review 23-Feb-22
09-Mar-22 LOR 13602 ROCKDALE ROAD
DEMOLISH 133 SQ. FT. ENCLOSED RIGHT SIDE
PORCH, ADD 1238 SQ. FT. FINISHED SPACE TWO
STORY SIDE ADDITION ON CONCRETE SLAB,
FIRST FLOOR TO BE USED AS EXPANDED
KITCHEN, HALF BATH, MUDROOM, LAUNDRY
ROOM, TWO CAR GARAGE, AND COVERED
FRONT PORCH, SECOND FLOOR TO BE USED AS
DEN, REC ROOM, AND HALF BATH, FRAME
CONSTRUCTION, PRE-ENGINEERED ROOF
BO2022-0009
Town of Boonsboro
Residential Building
Permit
II0029 Review 10-Mar-22 10-Mar-22 6449 KING ROAD, LOT 1
900 SQ. FT. DETACHED POLE BUILDING ON
GRAVEL BASE WITH 240 SQ. FT. LEAN TO, TO BE
USED FOR STORAGE, PRE-ENGINEERED ROOF
TRUSSES, POLE CONSTRUCTION WITH METAL
ROOF AND SIDES
2022-01152 Residential Addition-
Alteration Permit V106 Review 09-Mar-22
FK2022-0023
Town of Funkstown
Residential Building
Permit
I550 Review 22-Mar-22 22-Mar-22 15 WEST BALTIMORE
STREET
67 SQ. FT. INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO INCLUDE
ADDING FULL BATHROOM ON SECOND FLOOR
AND REMODEL FIRST FLOOR BATH TO
DOWNSIZE TO HALF BATH
Review Activities Summary
Application Type Application Number Passed - Info
Non-Residential Demolition Permit Total 0
Residential Addition-Alteration Permit Total 1
Residential New Construction Permit Total 1
Town of Boonsboro Residential Building Permit Total 1
Total 4
Town of Funkstown Residential Building Permit Total 1
MAHDC, 26 Pickburn Court, Cockeysville, MD 21030 * www.mahdc.org * director@mahdc.org
SAVE THE DATE!
MAHDC 2022 Annual Symposium
ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL
LANDSCAPES IN MARYLAND
WHERE: ST. MARY’S COLLEGE OF MARYLAND
ST. MARY’S CITY, MD
WHEN: SATURDAY, MAY 21, 2022
8:30 A.M. – 4:30 P.M.
Details about the program and registration coming soon!