The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05 - May Agenda Packet Gregory Smith, Chair Vernell Doyle Lloyd Yavener, Vice Chair Michael Lushbaugh Ann Aldrich Justin Bedard Brianna Candelaria Wayne K. Keefer, BOCC Rep HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET 747 Northern Avenue | Hagerstown, MD 21742 | P: 240.313.2430 | F: 240.313.2431 | TDD: 7-1-1 AGENDA May 1, 2024 Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. Washington County Administration Complex, 100 West Washington Street, Room 2001, Hagerstown, MD 21740 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL MINUTES 1. Minutes of the April 3, 2024 meeting * NEW BUSINESS 1. Antietam Farm (Gum Tree Farm) WA-II-371 National Register of Historic Places CLG Review – (Information/Discussion/Action) – To review documentation provided for the nomination using criteria for evaluation and criteria for consideration to make recommendation to the Maryland Historical Trust. * OTHER BUSINESS 1. Price’s Bridge, WA-I-291 – Meeting Facilitation and Support for County Departments * 2. Preservation Month 2024 a. May 7th is the Proclamation for Historic Preservation Month b. May 22nd at 6pm at the Downtown Library, 100 S. Potomac St., Hagerstown 3. Staff Report a. Staff Reviews * b. 250th Update c. By-Laws Update d. Historic Resource Tax Credit Ordinance Public Hearing Updates e. Heritage 2031 – Maryland Statewide Preservation Plan ADJOURNMENT UPCOMING MEETING 1. Wednesday, June 5, 2024, 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 April 3, 2024 The Washington County Historic District Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Wednesday, April 3, 2024 at 7:00 p.m. in the Washington County Administration 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, Michael Lushbaugh, Vernell Doyle, Ann Aldrich, and Justin Bedard. Staff members present were: Washington County Department of Planning & Zoning: Meghan Jenkins, GIS Coordinator and HDC Staff member. Also present at the meeting were: Paul Wade with Restoration Unlimited, and Jeffrey and Laura Lane- Unsworth, property owners of 13215 Smithsburg Pike. MINUTES Motion and Vote: Mr. Yavener made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 6, 2024 meeting as presented. The motion was seconded by Ms. Aldrich and unanimously approved. NEW BUSINESS 2024-00996 – 13215 Smithsburg Pike Addition/Alteration Permit Ms. Jenkins presented for review and approval a permit application for the addition/alteration of an existing 200 square foot covered porch which includes the railings and posts as well as replacement of the flooring. She noted there will be a slight change in the grading that goes up to the porch. There are currently five porch supports; the new plan shows three supports. Staff recommends approval of the permit application for the following reasons: the proposed work is in accordance with the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation which includes repairs when necessary or replacement in kind; this portion of the structure was not previously maintained and repairs will remedy will prevent further deterioration; the proposed work follows the HDC Design Guidelines for porches, completing the necessary steps for stabilization of the remaining viable portions of the porch; the proposed work is consistent with activity in the HP zone; the proposed improvements will remedy the unsafe conditions of the porch; and the proposed construction and materials are compatible with the existing structure. Motion and Vote: Mr. Yavener made a motion to approve the permit application as presented. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bedard and unanimously approved. OTHER BUSINESS Preservation Month 2024 Ms. Jenkins presented members with a spreadsheet showing a timeline of events and social media posts that will be used during the month of May. The Public Relations office will put a photo submission form on the website for people to submit photos of their favorite historic resource. There will be a Project Spotlight that will include such topics as tax credits, National Register nominations, the Unsworth project, and a collage of photos submitted. PR is working on a banner to be used during Preservation month. A Proclamation will be presented during the County Commissioners’ meeting on May 7th. Staff Report • Attended the Heart of the Civil War Heritage Area Grant review. Grant awards will be announced on July 11th. Several applications were received this year with good geographic distribution. • The historic resources web map has been updated. This update was made to aid in the 250th celebration and the replacement of markers on historic resources. • The County Attorney is currently reviewing the HDC By-laws. Staff has presented several recommendations to be included in the update. • The County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on April 29th for the changes to the Tax Credit Ordinance. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Lushbaugh made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:05 pm. The motion was seconded by Ms. Aldrich and so ordered by the Chairman. ______________________________________ Gregory Smith, Chairman HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMORANDUM To: Washington County Historic District Commission From: Meghan Jenkins, GISP, GIS Coordinator - Historic District Commission Staff Date: April 19, 2024 Subj: Antietam Farm (Gum Tree Farm, WA-II-371) National Register Nomination Background of the National Register CLG Process As a Certified Local Government (CLG), Washington County plays an important part in the process of nominating properties to the National Register of Historic Places (NR) through a special working relationship with the Maryland Historical Trust (MHT) and the National Park Service. Under this program, both the local historic preservation commission and the jurisdiction’s chief elected official (CEO) are asked to provide recommendations concerning eligibility for National Register Listing. The recommendation is submitted to MHT on the MHT CLG/NR Recommendation Form (Attachment 1) with supplemental information, as necessary. The Recommendation Form includes a detailed statement of the reasons for the recommendation, addressing National Register criteria for evaluation, and must be signed by both the Historic District Commission Chairperson and the President of the Board of County Commissioners. Because this property is an owner-initiated nomination, the local review process will only include the recommendation of the Historic District Commission. Staff Report A nomination packet was received from MHT on April 9, 2024, for Antietam Farm which is situated along Mills Road in the 3700 block. The farm complex is split by the roadway with the house on the west side and 2 barns on the east side included in the nomination. There is one non-contributing outbuilding on the property. The property is privately owned, and the nomination originates with the property owners. The property owner was notified of the HDC meeting. In May of 2006 the property was placed in a Rural Legacy Easement (Liber 2997 Folio 58). The purpose of the Rural Legacy Program is to protect farmland and open space which contain significant agricultural, environmental, and cultural/historic features. It should be noted that this program does NOT prevent the demolition of historic features once entered. There is no conflict between the potential National Register Status and the Rural Legacy Easement in place. Justification Highlight Antietam Farm is being nominated under Criterion A and Criterion C. Criterion A concerns a property associated with one or more events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. The documentation notes that this property is associated with the evolution of the wheat industry in the County and the Showman Family, who were the largest enslavers in the Sharpsburg District in the 1860’s. The property also played a role in Civil War, with the property being a headquarters and encampment after the Battle of Antietam. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION Criterion C concerns a property which embodies 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 significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The house is representative of a transition from Federal to Greek Revival with windows, sidelights, interior moldings and transoms around door openings depicting these architectural styles. The structure is a blend of vernacular architecture and these period trends. The Pennsylvania bank barn is one of the largest in South County with the two out sheds and wagon barn being unique among its comparable neighbors already on the National Register. Staff Recommendation: Recommend the nomination of Antietam Farm (Gum Tree Farm, WA-II-371) to the State Historic Preservation Officer as eligible for the National Register. Respectfully Submitted, Meghan Jenkins, GISP Historic District Commission Staff Attachments: • Maryland CLG NR Nomination Form (1) • Nomination Packet (2) • Criterion A/Criterion C NR Bulletin (3) Maryland Historical Trust • 100 Community Place • Crownsville • Maryland • 21032 Tel: 410.697.9591 • toll free 877.767.6272 • TTY users: Maryland Relay • MHT.Maryland.gov Wes Moore, Governor Aruna Miller, Lt. Governor Rebecca L. Flora, AICP, Secretary April 9, 2024 Meghan Jenkins Historic Preservation Commission Staff 747 Northern Ave Hagerstown, MD 21742 Re: Antietam Farm (Gum Tree Farm, WA-II-371) National Register Nomination Dear Ms. Jenkins, Our office has sent electronic draft documentation to nominate the above-referenced properties to the National Register of Historic Places, for processing by Washington County Historic District Commission under the Certified Local Government program. When the County’s review is complete, please forward the recommendations of the Commission and the County Executive. The nomination will be considered by the Governor’s Consulting Committee on May 7, 2024. Please contact me, at Jessica.french@maryland.gov or (410) 697-9623, with any questions. Once again, we appreciate your collaboration in the Certified Local Government process. Very truly yours, Jessica French National Register Administrator Maryland Historical Trust NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 expiration date 03/31/2026 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. 1. Name of Property Historic name: _Antietam Farm_____________________________________________ Other names/site number: _Gum Tree Farm, Frieze Farm, WA-II-371 _ Name of related multiple property listing: ____N/A_______________________________________________________ (Enter "N/A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing ____________________________________________________________________________ 2. Location Street & number: _3724 Mills Road____________________________________________ City or town: _Sharpsburg___________ State: _MD___________ County: _Washington__ Not For Publication: Vicinity: ____________________________________________________________________________ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this nomination ___ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property ___ meets ___ does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance: ___national ___statewide ___local Applicable National Register Criteria: ___A ___B ___C ___D Signature of certifying official/Title: Date ______________________________________________ State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 1-6 page 2 In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register criteria. Signature of commenting official: Date Title : State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government ______________________________________________________________________________ 4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that this property is: entered in the National Register determined eligible for the National Register determined not eligible for the National Register removed from the National Register other (explain:) _____________________ ______________________________________________________________________ Signature of the Keeper Date of Action ____________________________________________________________________________ 5. Classification Ownership of Property (Check as many boxes as apply.) Private: Public – Local Public – State Public – Federal Category of Property (Check only one box.) Building(s) District X X United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 1-6 page 3 Site Structure Object Number of Resources within Property (Do not include previously listed resources in the count) Contributing Noncontributing ____3_________ ______1_______ buildings _____________ _____________ sites _____________ _____________ structures _____________ _____________ objects ____3_________ _______1_______ Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register __0_______ ____________________________________________________________________________ 6. Function or Use Historic Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) _Domestic/Single Dwelling _Agriculture/agricultural outbuildings ___________________ ___________________ ___________________ ___________________ Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) _ Domestic/Single Dwelling _Agriculture/agricultural outbuildings United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 4 _____________________________________________________________________________ 7. Description Architectural Classification (Enter categories from instructions.) _Federal__________________ _Greek Revival__________________ ___________________ Materials: (enter categories from instructions.) Principal exterior materials of the property: Foundation-Stone; Dwelling Walls-Brick, Barn Walls-Brick and Wood; Porches-Wood Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current physical appearance and condition of the property. Describe contributing and noncontributing resources if applicable. Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property, such as its location, type, style, method of construction, setting, size, and significant features. Indicate whether the property has historic integrity.) ______________________________________________________________________________ Summary Paragraph Antietam Farm is located along Mills Road in a rural setting about four miles south of Sharpsburg in Washington County, Maryland. The farmstead consists of a ca. 1844 Federal/Greek Revival brick, two-and-one-half-story, five-bay, vernacular style dwelling on an 11-acre parcel of land on the western side of Mills Road, with a non-contributing, open five-bay frame equipment shed located south of the home and a modern, non-contributing gazebo to the west of the house. The contributing farm structures, including a mid-19th-century wagon shed and a brick-and-frame Pennsylvania bank barn, sit on 67 acres on the eastern side of Mills Road. The current owner of the farm bought the property in 1988 and set out to rehabilitate the house and return it to its mid-19th-century appearance. The house has had only four owners and was updated through the years to reflect current design trends. The rehabilitation has followed the Secretary of the Interior’s guidelines for restoring historic properties. Because no pictures existed of the house’s interior or exterior during the mid-19th century, much research went into the restoration. Reproduction elements were copied from originals found on the property, and nearby houses provided clues for adding period details. The owners employed master woodworkers, glaziers, and plasterers over the 30-year restoration effort. Many of the house’s original features, including doors, window shutters, shutter dogs, columns, pilasters, and a fireplace mantle, were found on the property and reused. The farm buildings have had the modern silos removed, and modern additions have been covered with period-correct materials in keeping with the historic viewshed. The house is located in a setting of rolling hills, pasture, and deciduous trees along the United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 5 slope of Red Hill.1 The property is in excellent condition, has remained in the exact location over the last 180 years, has preserved the historic viewshed around it, and maintains its ability to convey a sense of its history and association with the Civil War Battle of Antietam and the mid-19th century agriculture in this part of Washington County, MD. 1 Dennis Frye, NPS Historian and current owner of Antietam Farm, Personal Interview, Sharpsburg, MD, April 8, 2023.The southern edge of Red Hill terminates in a ravine which passes Burnside Bridge Road. The section of the ridge overlooking this property in unnamed. Dennis labeled it: “Showman’s Knoll.” United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 6 . Figure 1: USGS Map with location of Antietam Farm marked on either side of Mills Road Antietam Farm is located on both sides of Mills Rd. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 7 Narrative Description Antietam Farm’s dwelling is a brick, two-and-a-half story, five-bay, double-pile structure with a side-gabled, metal roof. The moderately pitched roof has a slight overhang and a cornice in the front with corbelling and brick dentils. The walls are 7/1 common or American bond, and the building sits on a raised basement of uncut, irregularly coursed limestone. The structure has paired interior end brick chimneys on both the north and south gables; brick corbelling decorates the chimney top. Extending from the south gable is a two-story, open wooden porch with a hipped metal roof and plain railings. The formal main entrance is in the front (east) façade in the middle bay. It is framed by a reconstructed (1997) single-story, single-bay, Greek Revival porch with a hipped roof. The porch rests on a stone foundation identical to the main house. The doorway opening has a brick jack arch above a seven-light transom. A four-pane sidelight borders each side of the eight-paneled door. Two simple square pilasters with capital and base trim frame the doorway opening. An unadorned entablature tops two square Doric columns supporting the porch roof. A plain oval railing connects the pilasters and columns with moderately spaced, unadorned square spindles. The symmetrical fenestration of the façade includes four six-over-six, double-hung sash windows on the first story, two on each side of the central entrance, and five six-over-six, double-hung sash windows on the second story. The first-story window openings have extended brick jack arches above them, with smaller brick jack arches above the second-story window openings. All windows are framed with original wooden shutters, held back with replica shutter dogs copied from an original found on site. Piercing the raised basement are four original, square ventilation windows aligned with the first-floor windows. The dwelling’s north elevation has paired interior end chimneys with common bond brickwork. There are six symmetrical window openings. The first story has two six-over-six, double-hung sash windows with jack arches and original wooden louvered shutters with shutter dogs on either side of the chimneys. On the second story, two six-over-six, double-hung sash windows with jack arches and original wooden louvered shutters with shutter dogs are directly above the first- story windows. Two single six-pane windows with brick jack arches are placed above the first- and second-story windows in the gable. The raised stone foundation is revealed to a fuller extent as the ground level falls away towards the back of the structure. One six-over-six, double-hung sash window with wooden paneled shutters pierces the stone foundation, aligned with the windows to the right of the chimneys. The west elevation (rear) reveals the full two-and-a-half-story height of the house, with the stone foundation and basement fully exposed. The common bond brickwork continues, and the rear cornice mirrors the corbelling and brick dentils on the façade. Six asymmetrically placed window openings are set in a three-bay configuration. The exposed basement has four openings (window, door, window, window). The first and fourth bays are vertically aligned with the windows above them; all are six-over-six, double-hung sash windows with paneled shutters. The door into the basement area is board and batten with sizeable wrought iron strap hinges. The first floor has three six-over-six double-hung sash windows with paneled shutters on the first and third United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 8 windows. The far left and right window openings align vertically with the windows below. The middle window has no shutters and is out of alignment horizontally with the rest of the first-story windows. This window appears to have initially been a door that led to a staircase.2 Two post holes were discovered approximately 20 feet west of this apparent doorway during excavation for underground electric wiring. It is surmised by the owner that these were part of the structural support for a backyard staircase.3 The second story has three six-over-six, double-hung sash windows with paneled shutters. The window openings align vertically with the windows below, but the middle window opening is out of alignment horizontally with the rest of the second-story windows. The back of the side porch extends from the right side of the house and is covered in weatherboard. The south elevation is dominated by a reconstructed (1997) four-bay, three-story wooden porch with stairs running from the basement level to the first floor and from the first floor to the second. The left bay of the porch is enclosed with weatherboard siding. A six-over-six, double-hung sash window with paneled shutters pierces the exposed stone foundation on the far right. A paneled door leads into the basement on the far left. The first-floor level of the porch has three asymmetrical openings. A wooden door with four lights in the upper portion is set on the far left below a transom. A six-over-six, double-hung sash window with louvered shutters is asymmetrically placed between the door on the left side of the porch and a six-panel wooden door on the right side. A wooden paneled door leads into a storage room in the first bay of the porch. The second-story openings follow the alignment of the openings on the first story (window, window, door). The window on the far left is a six-over-six, double-hung sash. There is a six-over-six, double-hung sash window with louvered shutters to the right of the door and a paneled door to the right of the window. The porch columns on the first floor are spare and unadorned. The porch columns on the second and third floors are chamfered, and the railing is the same as on the front porch. Above the porch roof, a small six-pane window pierces the center of the paired interior end chimneys; the chimney is corbeled at the top. The porch is original to the house’s design. The bricks making up the dwelling walls and part of the barn are hand-made and likely fired on-site just west of the house. One area has yielded brick remnants and whole bricks. Some of the bricks on the house show glazing. Several places on the outside walls, especially around door and window openings, indicate the brick was painted red with white penciled joints. The main entrance door and several interior doors are grained to look like oak or birds-eye maple and are original to the house. About 60% of the windowpanes are original to the house.4 The first-floor main entry door is grained to look like oak and is original to the house. The first- and second-story floor plans make the house’s symmetry apparent. A center passage and 2 Dennis Frye, Personal Interview, Sharpsburg, MD, April 8, 2023. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 9 stairway divide the four first-floor rooms. The more formal rooms (dining room and formal parlor) are located at the front of the house, while the more informal (kitchen and back parlor) are at the rear. All the first-floor rooms open to the center passage; doors also directly connect the two rooms (front and back parlor) on the northern side of the house and the two rooms (kitchen and dining room) on the house’s southern side. The north wall is 8” thick and made of plaster-covered brick. The opposite wall is 6” thick and is frame construction with plaster on lath. The first and second-floor center passage flooring is unfinished and is blind-nailed, tongue and grooved yellow pine that ranges in size from 4-6” wide. Doors leading from the passage to the dining room and front parlor and the doors between the front and back parlor are painted to simulate birds-eye maple. Fireplace mantles in the parlors and dining room are painted to simulate marble, while the kitchen fireplace mantle is plain. The hallway, kitchen, and parlor floors are blind-nailed yellow pine and original to the house. Figure 2: First floor plan of the house. Antietam Farmhouse plans courtesy of Leslie Clark. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 10 The main staircase is open from the first to the second floor and rises along the southern (left) side of the center passage. Unadorned balusters support rounded hand railings. The newel post is topped with an ornamental ball. The stairs are yellow pine, and the balusters and newel posts are of unknown wood and stripped of paint. Each stair on the right side has an original one-inch white strip paralleling the balusters. The riser ends are undecorated and painted white. A landing with a window separates the lower and upper staircases. The second-floor rooms mirror the first floor and open into the center passage but do not connect internally. The two southern-facing rooms have doors that lead out to the porch. At the head of the stairs is a modern bathroom. All the second-story rooms have fireplaces. All floors are unfinished, blind-nailed, tongue and groove yellow pine. Figure 3: Second floor plan of house. Antietam Farmhouse plans courtesy of Leslie Clark. A closed set of stairs rises from the second floor to the attic. Graffiti on the stairway wall is visible, though hard to make out. The attic is made up of two rooms of unequal size. An attached wooden ladder provides porch roof access through a window on the southern wall. The attic United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 11 reveals the roof framing assembled with common rafters, bridle joints, and half-lapped collar ties. Roman numerals on some rafters indicate scribe rule construction. Some minor archaeology around the house has yielded slate fragments. This and the nailers suggest that the original roof was probably slate. The paired interior end chimneys on the north and south gables lead to ten fully functioning fireplaces, each with its separate flue. The eastern chimneys have three flues each, and the western chimneys have two. Each room within the house has its own fireplace. Figure 4: Attic of house, Antietam Farmhouse plans courtesy of Leslie Clark. The interior basement comprises four rooms, two large and two small. The internal walls are original plaster-covered brick, while the exterior walls are original plaster-covered stone. The floor is poured concrete. A steeply angled open stairway descends from the first floor, set beneath the main staircase on the first floor. The southern basement room contains an original fireplace, a closet, and a door exiting underneath the porch on the southern wall. There are two windows on the west wall and entrances to two smaller rooms on the east side of the house. The fireplace is large, which could indicate that this was likely the kitchen. The original trim in this United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 12 room includes wainscoting around a portion of the walls and trim around the windows. A small modern bathroom has been added underneath the stairs. The smaller rooms each have a small ventilation window on the upper east wall. The northern basement room contains an original fireplace with a reproduction mantle and a window on the north side of the room, two small ventilation windows on the upper east wall, and one full-size window on the western side. This room is much plainer than the southern room, with no trim and just a timber lintel above each large window. Figure 5: Basement of house. Antietam Farmhouse plans courtesy of Leslie Clark. A white picket fence surrounds the house except for the rear. The fence ends at the back of the house on the west side. There is a small modern gazebo (non-contributing) behind the house. On the south side, a fieldstone patio extends from the house’s foundation wall to just beyond the porch overhang. A flower garden is enclosed on the south and east sides by a low, dry-laid stone wall; a stone walkway extends southwest from the patio to the picket fence. A small flowering United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 13 ornamental tree is adjacent to the house on the north side. South of the house is a modern, open five-bay shed. Across Mills Road from the house are the farm buildings. The Pennsylvania bank barn is a bent frame, double brick outshed, frame structure with a metal roof. Measuring 101 x 46 feet plus the brick outsheds, the 19th-century barn footprint is the largest barn in the area at almost 5000 square feet.5 With the 20th century additions the barn is still the largest in the area at nearly 8000 square feet.6 Single and double outshed barns are numerous in Washington County with construction dates between 1790-1860.7 The upper portion of the barn was for hay and grain, while the lower portion housed livestock. The outsheds on the north façade are made of brick. They functioned as granaries that were accessible from the threshing floor in the interior of the barn and the ramp on the outside. Both brick outsheds have decorative ventilation openings. The gable ends of the barn are wood. The interior features a bent frame, with the threshing floor separated into three sections. The louvered windows are original to the structure. A non-period one-story concrete addition is attached to the east side of the barn to house livestock. The forebay of the barn is open and has its original doors and hinges. After 1951, however, the forebay was extended, and a milking parlor was added to the west side of the barn. Further south of the barn is a cattle feeding station with a metal roof and the remains of three silos that were removed. Northwest of the barn is a two-bay frame wagon shed with a metal roof. All the farm outbuildings sit within a 63-acre pasture and are accessed via a wooden gate from Mills Road. Historical Integrity Antietam Farm demonstrates an exceptional degree of integrity across all seven areas as defined by the National Park Service’s Bulletin 15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. This narrative outlines the farm’s adherence to the criteria of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, underscoring its eligibility for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Location: Antietam Farm resides on the original acreage purchased by David Showman in 1842 from the Antietam Iron Works, although reduced from 255 to 74 acres. The positioning of the farmhouse, barn, and wagon shed on their original footprints along Mills Road signifies a high 5 Dennis Frye, Personal Interview, Sharpsburg, MD, April 8, 2023. In verifying this statement the following barns were examined either visually or the measurements were researched in Antietam National Battlefield documents. The Mumma Barn, The Newcomer Barn, the Miller Barn, the Pry Barn, the Piper Barn, and the Roulette Barn all on the Antietam National Battlefield. 6 Measurements taken of the Antietam Farm barn compared to that of the Piper Barn with its 20th century additions on the Antietam National Battlefield. 7 Robert F. Ensminger, The Pennsylvania Barn: Its Origin, Evolution, and Distribution in North America (Baltimore, SC: JHU Press, 2003), 95. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 14 level of integrity of location, maintaining the historical geographical context and linkage to the past. Design: The farm’s layout and architectural elements reflect its enduring function as a working farm. The farmhouse sits across from the farm buildings and is separated by Mills Road. The Pennsylvania Bank Barn’s timber frame and brick outsheds highlight a design that mirrors many Washington County, MD farms. With the removal of some dilapidated outbuildings and the strategic removal of modern intrusions, the remaining structures convey the farm’s original design purpose and mid-19th-century Federal/Greek Revival style, supplemented by local vernacular elements. Setting: With little change over the past 180 years, Antietam Farm’s setting continues to offer the same agricultural viewshed that has defined its landscape since the mid-19th century. The maintained acreage, now 63 acres, retains its agricultural purpose, with livestock grazing and fields of corn and grain. This continuity of use and minimal modern intrusion, alongside maintained topographical features, ensures a high integrity of setting. Materials: The farmhouse and barn have retained much of their original materials. Though, they were hidden behind or covered by modern improvements over the years. Restoration efforts have focused on uncovering and preserving these materials, such as the original brick, timber framing, and interior plaster walls, thereby maintaining a moderate to high level of material integrity. This dedication to preserving original materials enhances the authenticity of the farm’s historic character. Workmanship: The evident skill in the original and restoration workmanship of Antietam Farm highlights a high integrity in this area. Master craftsmen have ensured that restoration work adheres to historic patterns and standards. This attention to detail ensures the farm’s historical significance is accurately represented through its physical features. Feeling: Antietam Farm’s setting and preservation efforts evoke a strong sense of the past, reflecting its agricultural heritage and historical context within the Battle of Antietam area. The rural atmosphere, essentially unchanged landscape, and absence of modern intrusions contribute to a profound integrity of feeling, connecting visitors to the farm’s historic essence. Association: The farm’s sustained use as an agricultural entity firmly associates it with its historical roots. This continuous operation, alongside the preservation of the landscape and buildings, signifies a strong integrity of association, reinforcing Antietam Farm’s role as a representation of historical agricultural practices. Restoration of House and Barn When the current owners purchased Antietam Farm in 1988, the house had been modernized over the years according to then current styles and repairs made with non-period materials. For example, a four-bay Victorian porch was added circa 1915, spanning the front (east) elevation. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 15 The southern porch was rebuilt at that time using modern materials. There was evidence of water damage in the northeast corner of the house, and lightning had struck the north gable chimneys in the 1930s, damaging the brick. Repairs were made with Portland Cement. The original windows were covered by one-over-one storm windows and left like that for decades. The framing around most of the windows had rotted, and the glazing on the old windows was almost non-existent. The interior of the house was no better. The doors between the kitchen and the dining room on the first floor were removed and replaced with French doors. Central air conditioning had been added, with ductwork insulated with asbestos snaking around the house and hidden by faux walls. The ceilings were lowered and covered with square tiles, and linoleum and fiberboard covered the original pine floors. In many rooms, layers of wallpaper covered the ceiling and the walls. Other rooms had fir strips placed over the original plaster walls and covered by wood paneling. The trim work around the doors on the first floor had lost its definition due to numerous layers of paint. An ornate wire fence surrounded the site, and a dilapidated hog barn and tool shed were located directly to the west of the house. The restoration work included removing all the faux walls and the central air conditioning duct work with its asbestos insulation. The linoleum and fiberboard tile were removed, and the pine floors underneath were cleaned and left unfinished. Layers of paint were removed from around the trim work, which was brought down to the original wood and then repainted. The wallpaper on the ceiling and walls was carefully removed to leave as much plaster intact as possible. The wood paneling and fir strips attached to the plaster walls were painstakingly separated. All walls in the house are plaster-on-lath or plaster-on-brick. Where needed, the plaster was repaired. The ceiling plaster was retained, and drywall was attached. Drywall was also used around plumbing and electrical chases. Many architectural elements original to the house, such as pilasters, windows, columns, doors, window shutters, shutter dogs, and a fireplace mantle, were found in the outbuildings and under the front porch. The storm windows were removed from the original windows, which were then carefully removed from the frame. Master glazier Don Buck rebuilt and reglazed 26 windows. Great care was taken to ensure that the original glass remained intact. If replacement panes were needed, locally salvaged historic glass was used. The shutters found in the outbuildings were cleaned, repainted, and hung on the house’s east, north, and south elevations. Replicas were made of the original shutter dogs and placed below the shutters. The original front door, with its faux oak graining and hardware, was found in nearly perfect condition in an outbuilding. All that was needed was to clean and hang it. The original doors between the kitchen and the dining room were found in another outbuilding with their hardware intact. Eight of the ten fireplaces in the house had their original mantles. The rear parlor mantle was found in the tool shed, cleaned up, and returned to the rear parlor, where it fit perfectly. The circa 1915 Victorian porch was removed and replaced with a Greek Revival-style portico which was carefully researched for style and construction techniques by examining similar style porticos in the area, including the Sherrick House on the Antietam Battlefield. Both original United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 16 pilasters to the portico were found under the old porch. They were stable enough to be used in the reconstruction. The original portico columns, also found under the porch, were too deteriorated for reuse and were used as patterns to build new ones. The replacement columns were hand cut, planed, and joined using cut nails like the originals. The portico’s roof was modeled after a style of the same period found in the 19th-century architectural guide, The American Builder’s Companion, by Asher Benjamin. The book also provided details for the exact proportions of the different moldings and the size of the entablature. Archaeology had located the original portico’s foundation, helping to place the reconstructed porch in its original location. The result is a historically accurate portico that blends harmoniously into the front of the house.8 The massive porch on the southern end of the house is original to the house’s design. The original porch columns were logs covered with a faux exterior to resemble a Tuscan column and were found under the Victorian porch. When the front porch was replaced in 1915, the side porch was rehabilitated with concrete columns and a 6” concrete pad. The porches were rebuilt in 1997. The 1997 support columns are of a squared Tuscan design, made of wood to enclose steel supports. The storage rooms within the weatherboard section of the porch are also a modification later than the house’s construction date. Evidence shows that a first-story door was relocated to the kitchen and moved to its present-day first-floor location. Some of the latticework over the four basement openings was original. They were repainted, while new ones were recreated using the originals as a pattern. One of the small interior shutters on the basement openings is original. The other three were copied from the original. The fence surrounding the house was rebuilt in 1997. The pickets and posts are taken from a 19th-century design book and made of Spanish cedar to resist rot and insects. The 1200 pickets that make up the fence were made by hand at the local sawmill. A new roof was placed on the bank barn in 2012, and the foundation shored up. Three large silos were removed. The cement block exterior of the 1950s milking parlor was covered with parging, a period-looking stucco-like material to provide a more historic look. As detailed, Antietam Farm’s rehabilitation was extensive and focused on restoring the property to its mid-19th-century appearance while accommodating some modern necessities. The following is noted to assess the impact of these rehabilitation efforts on the property’s integrity. The rehabilitation did not alter the original location of the Farm or its structures. The farmhouse, barn, and other outbuildings remain on their historical footprints. Thus, the rehabilitation preserved the site’s integrity. 8 Sylvia Frye, "A Restoration Challenge," Ranger: The Journal of the Association of National Park Rangers 5, no. 7 (Fall 2000): 5. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 17 The efforts to remove modern additions and restore or reproduce the property’s original features, such as replacing the Victorian porch with a Greek Revival-style portico, reflect a commitmentto preserving the farm’s historical design. The farm owners are former NPS staff familiar with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. They used these standards as guidelines for the restoration of the Antietam Farm. The rehabilitation enhanced the integrity of design by researching and replicating architectural elements based on historical records and using original pieces as patterns. Original elements found in various locations around the farm and placed back in their original context enhanced the integrity of workmanship and materials. Although the farm’s acreage has decreased and the area around it has developed, strategic decisions during rehabilitation, such as placing trees and preserving the agricultural landscape, have maintained the historical setting. The viewshed remains largely intact, preserving the integrity of setting. The restoration focused on uncovering and preserving original materials, like the pine floors and brick exteriors, and using historically accurate replacements when necessary. Original elements found in various locations around the farm were placed back in their original context. This approach maintained the integrity of materials by ensuring that the physical elements contributing to the property’s historic identity were preserved or replicated. The detailed restoration work, carried out by master craftsmen and guided by historical patterns and techniques, preserved the high level of original craft in the property’s construction. This careful attention to preserving and replicating the historical workmanship has upheld the integrity of workmanship. The rehabilitation of Antietam Farm has positively affected the property’s integrity, as identified in NPS Bulletin 15. Through careful and informed restoration efforts, the project has preserved or enhanced each of the seven aspects of historic integrity. The property remains a credible and tangible witness to its past, meeting the criteria for historical significance and integrity outlined by the NPS. This successful rehabilitation ensures that Antietam Farm continues to convey its historical values and significance accurately to future generations. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 18 Figure 6: East side of farmhouse in 1988 before restoration. Photo by Dennis Frye. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 19 Figure 7: South side of farmhouse in 1988 before restoration. Photo by Dennis Frye. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 20 Figure 8: Farm outbuildings, east of main house across Mills Road as they appeared at time of purchase in 1988. Photo by Dennis Frye. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 21 Figure 9: Interior view of farmhouse facing the front door with front parlor on left and dining room on right before restoration in 1988. Photo by Dennis Frye. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 22 Figure 10: Interior view of the front and back parlor facing the back parlor. Before restoration in 1998. Photo by Dennis Frye. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 7 page 23 Figure 11: Interior view of dining room with kitchen entrance to the right. Before restoration in 1988. Photo by Dennis Frye. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 24 _________________________________________________________________ 8. Statement of Significance Applicable National Register Criteria (Mark "x" in one or more boxes for the criteria qualifying the property for National Register listing.) A. Property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. B. Property is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past. C. Property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. D. Property has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Criteria Considerations (Mark “x” in all the boxes that apply.) A. Owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes B. Removed from its original location C. A birthplace or grave D. A cemetery E. A reconstructed building, object, or structure F. A commemorative property G. Less than 50 years old or achieving significance within the past 50 years Areas of Significance (Enter categories from instructions.) _Agriculture_________ _Architecture________ _Military___________ ___________________ ___________________ X X United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 25 Period of Significance _1842-1905_________ ___________________ Significant Dates _1842-1905_________ _1862______________ ___________________ Significant Person (Complete only if Criterion B is marked above.) ___________________ ___________________ ___________________ Cultural Affiliation ___________________ ___________________ ___________________ Architect/Builder ___________________ ___________________ ___________________ Statement of Significance Summary Paragraph (Provide a summary paragraph that includes level of significance, applicable criteria, justification for the period of significance, and any applicable criteria considerations.) Antietam Farm, located in Washington County, Maryland, exemplifies significant contributions to local agricultural development and architectural distinction, meriting inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A and C. The period of significance is justified by the period of Showman family ownership, beginning in 1842 when the property was purchased by David Showman, through 1905, when the property was sold out of Showman family ownership by David’s heirs. Its historical relevance under Criterion A is rooted in its role in the evolution of Washington County into a leading wheat-producing region by 1860, underscored by its association with the Showman Family, prominent landowners and the largest enslavers in the Sharpsburg District. The farm’s historical significance is further augmented by its role after the Battle of Antietam. It served as Union General Ambrose Burnside’s headquarters, a strategic meeting place for President Lincoln and General Burnside, and an encampment site for the Union Army’s Ninth United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 26 Corps. Despite changes in ownership, Antietam Farm has preserved its agricultural legacy, maintaining operational continuity since its establishment in 1842. Under Criterion C, Antietam Farm stands out for its architectural significance, showcasing regionally distinctive brick mid-nineteenth century construction. The house reflects the stylistic transition from Federal to Greek Revival. This architectural transition is evident through features such as boldly delineated windows, sidelights, transoms around door openings, and intricately molded woodwork, albeit with a noticeable absence of some Greek Revival elements, typical of Washington County’s conservative building traditions. The farm buildings include a wagon shed and the largest Pennsylvania bank barn in the area. The farm’s architectural integrity is further highlighted by the preservation of original features and materials, offering insights into mid-19th-century construction practices and aesthetic choices. A comparative analysis of similar farms within a seven-mile radius underscores Antietam Farm’s unique architectural and historical attributes. Considering factors such as integrity, age, material, and style, this survey situates Antietam Farm among the most representative examples of the region’s vernacular architecture, influenced by broader architectural trends adapted to local building traditions. In conclusion, Antietam Farm’s enduring agricultural use, historical associations with significant events, and distinctive architectural features affirm its eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places. Its contribution to understanding local agricultural development, the impact of the Civil War on the community, and the evolution of architectural styles in Washington County, MD, makes it a compelling candidate for preservation and recognition. ______________________________________________________________________________ Narrative Statement of Significance (Provide at least one paragraph for each area of significance.) National Register Criteria Criterion A 1. Agricultural and Industrial Significance: The establishment of Antietam Farm and its evolution throughout the period of significance from 1842 – 1905 reflect the broader patterns of agricultural and industrial development in the region. The farm’s historical context, starting with early European settlement and land use for agriculture and milling, was pivotal for the local economy and the area’s development. The growth of the flour mill industry and the establishment of the Antietam Iron Works are significant events that illustrate the region’s industrialization and its role in supporting the burgeoning agricultural economy. These industries were integral to the area’s development and economic prosperity. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 27 2. Civil War and Its Aftermath: By 1862, Antietam Farm was part of the largest and wealthiest landholdings in the Sharpsburg District, and the Showman Family were the largest enslavers. Although the Farm was not directly affected by the Battle of Antietam due to its location, it was significantly impacted by the aftermath, serving as headquarters for Union General Ambrose Burnside and troops of the Union Ninth Corps. General Burnside met with Abraham Lincoln at the farm, and who most likely spent the night there, and conducted a review of the 11,000 men of the Ninth Corps the next day. The presence of Union troops, the encampment, and the toll they took on Antietam Farm’s productivity illustrate the logistical and human impact of the war on the local community and landscape. 3. Continuity of Agricultural Use: The continued use of Antietam Farm for agricultural purposes from its establishment in the mid-19th century through to the present day reflects the enduring importance of agriculture in the region. The farm’s ability to adapt and continue operating through significant historical events, including the Civil War Battle of Antietam and industrialization, demonstrates its resilience and significance in the broader patterns of American agricultural history. In conclusion, Antietam Farm meets Criterion A for its association with significant trends that have contributed to the broad patterns of American history, including agricultural development, industrialization, and the impact of the Civil War on the local community. The farm’s historical integrity, evidenced by its continuous agricultural use and association with significant historical events, supports its nomination. Antietam Farm’s dwelling and structures support its nomination under Criterion C (Design/Construction) for the National Register of Historic Places due to its architectural significance, embodying the distinctive characteristics of a period, construction method, and representation of an architectural style. 1. Architectural Significance and Integrity: Antietam Farm’s brick, two-and-a-half story, five-bay, double-pile dwelling showcases distinctive Greek Revival elements with a side- gabled, moderately pitched roof, cornices, corbelling, brick dentils, and front portico. The farm is unique as there are only a handful of brick Greek Revival/Federal farmsteads in the area, indicating a wealthy farmer class. The dwelling’s architectural elements indicate a period style and construction method, demonstrating high craftsmanship and attention to architectural detail. 2. Material and Construction Techniques: The use of 7/1 common or American bond brickwork for the walls and the raised basement of uncut, irregularly coursed limestone highlight the construction techniques and materials prevalent during the dwelling’s construction. The paired interior end H-shaped brick chimneys with corbelling at the chimney top further exemplify the period’s construction methods and aesthetic preferences. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 28 3. Design Features: The symmetrical fenestration, reconstructed Greek Revival porch, original wooden shutters with replica shutter dogs, unique three-story side porch, unusual full basement, and the overall symmetry of the structure reflect the Georgian/Federal architectural styles with influences of Greek Revival and local vernacular design, which were popular in the period the dwelling was constructed. These design features contribute to the dwelling’s architectural significance. 4. Historical Context and Comparison: A survey of similar farms built between 1820 and 1860 contextualizes Antietam Farm within the area’s broader architectural and societal framework, demonstrating its significance as an isolated structure and as part of the regional development pattern. A comparison with other properties, some of which are already listed on the National Register, underscores Antietam Farm’s architectural importance and integrity. (See Section 8, Page 14.) 5. Preservation of Original Features: The preservation of original features such as the hand-made bricks likely fired on-site, the original main entrance door grained to look like oak, the blind-nailed, tongue and groove yellow pine flooring, and the original fireplace mantles in each room, contribute to the dwelling’s architectural integrity. These preserved features offer a direct link to the construction practices and aesthetic choices of the period, making the dwelling an important example of regional architecture. 6. Vernacular Architecture Representation: Antietam Farm represents a blend of vernacular architecture and period architectural trends, such as Georgian/Federal and Greek Revival styles, adjusted to local traditions and materials. This blend is essential in understanding the evolution of architectural styles and construction techniques in the region. In summary, Antietam Farm’s dwelling meets Criterion C for the National Register of Historic Places because of its detailed architectural design, preservation of original materials and features, and its place within the region’s broader historical and architectural context. Its significance is further underscored by the comparative analysis with other historic properties, demonstrating its architectural integrity and importance as a representative of the area’s vernacular architecture influenced by national trends. Comparative Analysis Using the Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties database, a survey of similar farms built between 1820 and 1860 was conducted to contextualize Antietam Farm within the area’s broader architectural and societal framework. Farms within a seven-mile radius were examined with Antietam Farm as the center point. The area included comparable small towns - Sharpsburg, Keedysville, Rohersville, Burkittsville, and Knoxville. Antietam Farm’s history also includes a United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 29 strong connection with the Battle of Antietam, so the battlefield and its farmsteads were included in the historic resource comparison.9 The survey provided information on farm architecture, materials, and age and looked into the agricultural wealth of the Sharpsburg area. The number of large farms with well-constructed dwellings indicated that many farmers in Washington County would be considered middle to upper-middle-class. Further analysis from other sources revealed that the wealth these farms possessed was demonstrated in agricultural output, acreage, livestock, the total value of farms, and, in some cases, the ownership of enslaved workers. Within the seven-mile radius, 55 farms of 20 acres or more were built between 1820 and 1845. Through a careful process of elimination, only four were found to be the most like Antietam Farm in terms of integrity, area, age, material, and architectural style.10 The four properties are: Mount Airy (NR# 86001150, WA-II-469), the Hoffman Farm (NR# 97001183; MIHP WA-11- 251), Philip Pry House (MIHP WA-II-355), and the Sherrick House (MIHP WA-II-334) (Table 1). Pry and Sherrick are both contributing resources to Antietam National Battlefield (NR# 66000038, MIHP WA-II-477). According to their National Register nominations, all four farms are good representations of the area’s vernacular architecture. All four farms are within a six- mile radius of Antietam Farm, all have brick dwellings constructed between 1820 and 1845, and all have/had large bank barns and extensive acreage. Each house has elements of Georgian/Federal architecture. Three of the houses have Greek-Revival aspects, and all four houses have features that indicate the architectural trends of the period and local building traditions (Table 2).11 9 Brianna Candelaria, A Cultural Landscape Study to Determine Eligibility of a Local Farm Under Criteria C for the National Register, (Sharpsburg, MD, 2023). 10 Ibid 11 Lisa Pfueller Davidson and Catherine C. Lavoie, Buildings of Maryland (Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press, 2022), 357. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 30 Figure 12: Hoffman Farm. Courtesy of John Banks’ Civil War Blog. Figure 13: Mount Airy (Grove Farm). Courtesy of the Maryland Historical Trust. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 31 Figure 14: Sherrick Farm. Courtesy of Preservation Maryland. Figure 15: Philip Pry Farm. Courtesy of NPS. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 32 Table 1: Similar Farms to Antietam Farm within a seven-mile radius12 Mt. Airy (Grove Farm) WA-II-469 Hoffman Farm WA-II-251 Sherrick Farm WA-II-355 Pry Farm WA-II-334 Antietam Farm WA-II-371 National Register Status On the National Register On the National Register Contributing Structure to Antietam NB (NR) Contributing Structure to Antietam NB (NR) N/A Type of House L-shaped Single Pile with two-story extension Rectangular block L-shaped Rectangular block Date Built 1820 1840s 1830s 1844 1844 Building Material Brick Brick Brick Brick Brick Bond Type Flemish and Common Common Bond Flemish and Common Flemish and Common Common Bond Chimney type Two internal chimneys, two interior-end chimneys. Two gable end chimneys, one in center Two interior chimneys and a paired interior- end chimney Three interior chimneys, one interior- end chimney Paired interior- end chimneys Stories Two Two Two and a half Two Two and a half Outbuildings (historic) Late 19th century frame barn with metal roof ventilation Frame bank barn with a cantilevered forebay with shed extension Brick summer kitchen, barn is gone Frame bank barn with a cantilevered forebay with shed extension Bank Barn with two outsheds and wagon barn. 12 Brianna Candelaria, A Cultural Landscape Study to Determine Eligibility of a Local Farm Under Criteria C for the National Register, (Sharpsburg, MD, 2023). United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 33 Table 2: Architectural elements of the five farms Farm Dwelling Georgian Architectural Elements13 Federal Architectural Elements14 Greek-Revival Architectural Elements15 Vernacular Architectural Elements16 Mount Airy - Five bays on front façade - Hipped Roof - Five bays on front façade - Windows aligned vertically and horizontally in symmetrical rows - Elliptical fanlight - Double Sash Windows - Side attached, two story kitchen wing with tiered inset porches - Perpendicular ell w/ double porch - Gable and hip roofline Hoffman Farm - Five bays on front façade - Five bays on front façade - Windows aligned vertically and horizontally in symmetrical rows - Side-gabled roof - Double Sash Windows - Entry porch with Doric style columns - Front door with transom and sidelights - Side attached, two story kitchen wing with tiered inset porches -Built over a spring in the cellar Sherrick Farm - Five bays on front façade - Hipped roof - Five bays on front façade - Windows aligned vertically and horizontally in symmetrical rows - Side-gabled roof - Double Sash Windows - Entry porch with Doric style columns - Front door with transom and sidelights - Built over a spring in the cellar - Built into a hill - Double gallery - Gable and hip roofline Pry Farm - Five bays on front façade - Hipped roof - Five bays on front façade - Windows aligned vertically and horizontally in symmetrical rows - Side-gabled roof - Double Sash Windows - Entry porch with Doric style columns - Front door with transom and sidelights -Perpendicular ell w/double porch - Gable and hip roofline Antietam Farm - Five bays on front façade - Five bays on front façade - Windows aligned vertically and horizontally in symmetrical rows - Side-gabled roof - Double Sash Windows - Cornice emphasized with moldings and dentils - Entry porch with Doric style columns - Front door with transom and sidelights -Double story porch on south side of house. 13 Virginia McAlester and Arcie L. McAlester, A Field Guide to American Houses (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1984), 201. 14 Ibid, 218-219. 15 Ibid, 247-248. 16 Lisa Pfueller Davidson and Catherine C. Lavoie, Buildings of Maryland (Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press, 2022), 357. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 34 Tables 1 and 2 show how Antietam Farm fits within and compares to the local vernacular architecture identified by the comparable farms. Antietam Farm is a true representation of the region’s upper-middle-class organic style. Like many farms in the area, the house and farm buildings were most likely designed and built by local artisans. The resources used to build Antietam Farm and the other farms were local. Wood for framing, clay and sand for bricks, limestone for foundations, springs, and landforms were all incorporated into the building process. Most historic houses in Washington County are a mix of architectural styles. However, the simplicity of their design reduces the characteristics of any identifiable style. Antietam Farm and the four comparable farms display far more distinctive traditional and vernacular architectural elements than many of their counterparts. The building of these farms was a direct response to the specific needs of larger families and the inclusion of enslaved workers in the household because more land required more labor. This was a society settled in its agricultural practices. Antietam Farm, Mount Airy, the Hoffman Farm, the Pry Farm, and the Sherrick Farm represent their owner’s economic and social standing through their location, culture, history, and identity. Comparison of Farms Through Criterion A (Event) 1. Historical Context and Associations: Antietam Farm’s proximity and connection to significant historical events, particularly the Civil War and the Battle of Antietam, are similar to the other four farms. Because of their geographical closeness to the battlefield, the Pry and Sherrick Farms were directly affected by the battle, with the Sherrick Farm located between the battle lines and the Pry farm serving as headquarters for senior Union Staff. Antietam Farm, Mount Airy, and the Hoffman Farm did not experience direct battle repercussions. After the battle, the Pry Farm, Hoffman Farm, and Mount Airy were used as field hospitals. Mount Airy and Antietam Farm were long-term headquarters and encampment sites for Union Generals and their respective army units. Mount Airy hosted General Fitz-John Porter and the Fifth Corps, while Antietam Farm hosted General Ambrose Burnside and the Ninth Corps. Both farms were visited by President Lincoln in October 1863. Burnside hosted Lincoln at Antietam Farm, possibly overnight, with the visit leading to a mass review of the Ninth Corps the next day. Compared to the other farms, Antietam Farm is larger than the other farms in the Sharpsburg District at 790 acres; the Showman Family enslaved the most workers and were the wealthiest landowners. After the battle of Antietam, the farm was the site of a grand review overseen by Lincoln, who met with Union General Ambrose Burnside at the Farm. Burnside was shortly to be made the new commander of the Army of the Potomac. Antietam Farm’s detailed history, in conjunction with the early history of Sharpsburg and its role in the aftermath of the battle, offers a direct and tangible link to a pivotal moment in American history. This connection highlights its contribution to understanding the impact of the Civil War on the local community and landscape. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 35 Comparison of Farms Through Criterion C (Design/Construction) 1. Architectural Integrity and Preservation: The detailed description in Section 7 highlights a high level of Antietam Farm’s conservation of original materials, restoration to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and attention to historical accuracy. This level of detail and preservation surpasses the other four examples, especially in maintaining original features that offer insights into the period’s construction practices and aesthetic choices.17 2. Distinctive Architectural Features: The dwelling’s combination of Georgian/Federal architectural styles with Greek Revival influences, as evident in its symmetrical fenestration, the design of its porches, a full basement, and lack of an ell, sets it apart from the other farms. While all four comparative examples possess elements of Georgian/Federal architecture and some have Greek Revival aspects, Antietam Farm’s specific blend of these styles, along with the preservation of unique features (such as the original fireplaces, three-story side-porch, and the hand-made bricks likely fired on-site), underscores its architectural distinction. 3. Adaptation of National Trends to Local Building Traditions: Antietam Farm exemplifies the adaptation of national architectural trends to local building traditions in a manner that is possibly more pronounced or better documented than the other examples. This adaptation is a key aspect of its significance under Criterion C, as it represents a tangible connection between broader architectural movements and the region’s vernacular architecture. The comparison with other historic farms reveals that while some may have elements of Georgian/Federal architecture or connections to the Civil War, none offer the comprehensive historical and architectural significance found at Antietam Farm. The farm’s unique position as the home of the region’s most prominent landowners and enslavers before the war, its strategic importance after the Battle of Antietam, and its architectural distinction after careful restoration efforts make it an unparalleled candidate for the National Register of Historic Places. Historic Context The first European deeded landowner west of South Mountain was Israel Friend. Friend’s 1727 “Indian Deed” commenced at the mouth of Antietam Creek. It included land on the west side of the Antietam, and it ran northwest parallel to the Potomac River toward modern-day Shepherdstown.18 Friend’s tract did not include Antietam Farm (established 115 years later), as the “Indian Deed” did not extend east of the Antietam. Friend’s proximity, however, did 17 Mount Airy has not been restored or rehabilitated, the Hoffman Farm has not been restored to its historical interiors, the Pry Farmhouse lost original materials in a fire, and the Sherrick House is not a complete, working farmstead as it is missing its barn, and is on the National Battlefield. 18 Ted Ellis, Roads of Colonial Western Maryland (Middletown, DE), 2019, 34-36. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 36 influence the earliest European migrations, as they traveled south from Pennsylvania utilizing former indigenous routes. One such route –“Israel Friend’s road” – passed through the heart of what was to be Antietam Farm. Local historian Ted Ellis surmised modern-day Mills Road formed a segment of the western terminus of “Israel Friend’s Road.” Ellis also theorized that the earliest European settlers in the Shenandoah Valley (Josh Hite and 16 families) utilized “Israel Friend’s Road” as the final portion of their journey from Pennsylvania toward the Potomac River. The topography of Antietam Farm supports Ellis’ hypothesis. Mills Road passes through a distinct ravine that emerges at the mouth of the Antietam, and this ravine is the only easy route to the Potomac. More formal European settlement of Maryland’s western frontier, beyond South Mountain in Frederick County, began in 1732 when Charles Calvert, Fifth Lord Baltimore, opened the area with the advertisement, “We being desirous to increase the number of honest people within our province of Maryland and willing to give suitable encouragement to such to come and reside therein.”19 With the advertisement came a promise of 200 acres of land to anyone settling between the Potomac and the Susquehanna. The influx of prospective settlers was initially slow. Much land was held in warrants or purchased by wealthy speculators who resided in the eastern part of the colony. Those settlers who came to western Maryland, specifically Washington County, were largely Scotch-Irish or German immigrants who initially came to Pennsylvania. Finding much of the good fertile land already taken, they followed the Philadelphia Wagon Road west and south. The road began in Philadelphia as a primary route for settlers moving south toward the Monocacy Valley and Frederick, then veered west across South Mountain at Fox’s Gap, and then past the Big Spring in modern Sharpsburg to the Packhorse Ford crossing of the Potomac.20 This road (distinct from “Israel Friend’s road’) became a primary route for settlers by the mid-eighteenth century. The road is mentioned in some of the early land patents in Washington County. In 1736, Richard Sprigg patented “Piles Grove” or “Piles Delight,” just north of Sharpsburg. The survey certificate from 1734 states, “… beginning at a White Oak near a small branch and near a large spring… about a mile from a road called the Waggon Road…”21 Prospective settlers following roads south and west would have traveled through Antietam Creek’s valley, and many stayed in the area. By 1754, a Lutheran Congregation was established at Antietam. As mentioned above, most settlers were tenants on land owned by speculators. These tenants, primarily German, established agriculture in this area. Early farmers like Joseph Chapline, a planter from the eastern part of Maryland, attempted to grow tobacco, but the crop was not suited for the soil or the weather. In fact, Chapline’s unsuccessful tobacco fields would 19 Thomas J. Williams, A History of Washington County, Maryland: From the Earliest Settlements to the Present Time, Including a History of Hagerstown (Baltimore: Regional Publishing Company, 1968), 20. 20 Ellis, Roads of Colonial Western Maryland (Middletown, DE), 2019, 93-95. 21 "Antietam National Battlefield National Register Nomination," National Park Service, accessed April 21, 2023, https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/66000038. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 37 later serve as the outline of lots for Sharpsburg, the community he established in 1763.22 While tobacco failed, the early German settlers planted grain, which thrived in the Antietam Valley, and the mills needed to grind the grain were established along the banks of nearby creeks. Stull’s Mill along the Antietam and Witmer Mill along Beaver Creek were in operation by 1739.23 Settlement stalled with the French and Indian War, and many of the region’s inhabitants fled east of South Mountain and then returned at the war’s end.24 In 1763, Joseph Chapline founded the town of Sharpsburg, three miles east of the Potomac River. In 1765, a ferry service started between Maryland and Virginia. By 1768, German settlers had established themselves in Sharpsburg. New roads connected Frederick, Shepherdstown, Sharpsburg, Keedysville, and Elizabethtown, now Hagerstown. Those roads would connect with Baltimore. The 1783 U.S. Tax Assessment lists 20 flour mills along the Antietam drainage; by 1790, there were 23 mills. According to Susan Trail, “Eastern Washington County, with its large mills along Antietam Creek, probably represented the most advanced stage of market integration in the county.”25 It can be argued that the Antietam Valley’s agricultural and milling growth in the late 18th century was directly linked to the Baltimore market.26 To support the number of mills in the Antietam drainage, grain production would need to be high.27 David Showman, the originator of Antietam Farm, benefitted from generational wealth produced by the flour mill industry. Showman’s grandfather, John Shawman, owned a mill on the Little Antietam Creek along present-day Mt. Briar Road, about two miles south of modern-day Keedysville. Today, this location is known as Eakle’s Mill, named after a nineteenth-century owner. According to the 1783 Tax Assessments, Shawman’s mill was assessed at 125 pounds, representing nearly one-quarter of his estimated wealth.28 Twenty years later, in the 1803-1804 Tax Assessments, Shawman (now spelled Showman) had become wealthy enough to enslave people. One of his enslaved was a female between 14-36 years old, valued at 30 pounds. Two others were enslaved children under age 8, worth a total of 10 pounds.29 By the turn of the nineteenth century, Shawman had established himself among the gentry of southern Washington County. 22 "Antietam National Battlefield National Register Nomination," National Park Service, accessed April 21, 2023, https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/66000038. 23 Susan W. Frye, "Evolution of mill settlement patterns in the Antietam drainage, Washington County, Maryland", (Master's thesis, College of William and Mary - Arts and Sciences, 1984), 38, https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-ce0b-rb67. 24 "Antietam National Battlefield National Register Nomination," National Park Service, accessed April 21, 2023, https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/66000038. 25 Susan W. Frye, "Evolution of mill settlement patterns in the Antietam drainage, Washington County, Maryland", (Master's thesis, College of William and Mary - Arts and Sciences, 1984), 44, https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2- ce0b-rb67. 26 Ibid, 46. 27 "Antietam National Battlefield National Register Nomination," National Park Service, accessed April 21, 2023, https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/66000038. 28 https://digital.whilbr.org/digital/collection/p16715coll50/id/23/rec/6. 29 https://digital.whilbr.org/digital/collection/p16715coll46/id/80/rec11. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 38 Figure 16: Flour mills listed in the 1783 tax assessment (Drawn by Anne S. Beckett).30 Antietam Iron Works and the Further Development of Agriculture The Sharpsburg area also boasted another industry, iron. In 1763, Joseph Chapline, partners, and investors developed the Antietam Iron Works at the mouth of Antietam Creek. Iron ore was the most valuable mineral discovered in Washington County during the early settlement period. According to local historian Michael Thompson in his thesis The Iron Industry in Western Maryland: On the eve of the American Revolution, the iron industry of the 13 colonies was producing annually in excess of 30,000 tons of pig iron. The size of the industry in the North American 30 Susan E. Winter, "Mill Settlement Patterns Along the Antietam Creek Drainage, Washington County, Maryland," Spatial Patterning in Historical Archaeology: Selected Studies of Settlement, 1994, 74. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 39 colonies far exceeded everything the British could muster. As a matter a fact, it rated among the top five producers in the world.31 Frederick Forge Furnace operated at the mouth of the Antietam by 1767. Soon renamed the Antietam Iron Works, it became the most significant and longest-surviving iron furnace in Washington County. The 1783 Tax Assessment revealed the iron works was worth 1,500 pounds – the most valuable industry in the county. It reported 35 enslaved workers (above age 11) valued at 1,945 pounds. The company’s landholdings spanned almost 8,000 acres, including Elk Ridge.32 Twenty years later, enslaved workers had grown to 56 – a 60 % increase.33 A rolling and sifting mill was added by 1810, and the iron works employed 150 men earning collectively nearly $30,000.34 Two years before David Showman’s establishment of Antietam Farm, the iron works included a nail and spike factory that produced 400-500 kegs weekly. The company employed 250 workers in addition to 53 enslaved workers, and the company’s value was $80,000.35 However, the decade of the 1840s was one of persistent failure; due to the insurmountable debts of owner John McPherson Brien, the business folded entirely. In January 1848, 150 workers were discharged without pay. A forced sale of 49 enslaved people occurred because “there was little food for the slaves.” The landholdings were broken into saleable units, and nearly 4,000 acres were sold.36 David Showman, residing at his “Home Farm” only two miles from the Antietam Iron Works, was aware of its financial stress. By the fall of 1841, Brien had mortgaged one-half his interest in the iron works, and he needed cash. Showman saw an opportunity and purchased the land that would become Antietam Farm. 31 M. D. Thompson, The Iron Industry in Western Maryland (1976), 8. 32 Ibid, 33. 33 Ibid, 38. 34 Ibid, 79-80. 35 Ibid, 88-90. 36 Ibid, 91-94. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 40 Figure 17: Map of Sharpsburg area in 1794 showing the Antietam Iron Forge. Map courtesy of Library of Congress. At the same time, the iron industry was growing in the region, and an agricultural boom was in progress. Central Maryland became the “breadbasket of the state.” By 1810, the state was the third largest flour-producer in the country, with Washington County leading the way.37 The Hagerstown Torch Light and Public Advertiser stated in the March 31st, 1831, issue, There are in Washington County upwards of sixty-four flour mills: those of the first class, manufacturing 10,000, and those of the lowest, say 500 barrels per annum. We are told that the average of the whole would not be high at 3000 barrels. In this estimate the grist works for the consumption of the county is not included, but the flour sold by the barrel in our towns and villages is. With the latter deduction from the above statement it is believed that we send annually to market 130,000 bbls. Being one fifth of all the flour inspected in Baltimore. The purchase of wheat in Hagerstown alone, disburses $1000 per day during the year.38 Between 1790 and 1860, Baltimore’s population grew by 200,000 people. During the same period, Washington County’s population also grew, exceeding 16,000 new inhabitants when 37 "Antietam National Battlefield National Register Nomination," National Park Service, accessed April 21, 2023, https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/66000038. 38 "The Torch Light and Public Advertiser 10 Mar 1831, Page 2," Historical Newspapers from 1700s-2000s - Newspapers.com, accessed May 14, 2023. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 41 little to no growth occurred in the eastern counties.39 There is a direct connection between the population growth in Baltimore and Western Maryland and the expansion of agriculture in Washington County. The addition of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, as well as the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, allowed transportation of the county’s goods to eastern markets. Enslaved Workers and Agriculture in Washington County As the economy in Washington County moved from frontier settlement to agricultural powerhouse, the number of enslaved workers grew, but compared with Maryland’s eastern counties, Washington County’s enslaved population was not large. It peaked in 1820 at 3,201.40 By 1842, when the property that would become Antietam Farm was purchased by David Showman, the enslaved population stood at 2,546.41 The census records for David that same year indicated that the family held 12 enslaved workers.42 The 1850 census indicates that 2,090 people were enslaved in Washington County.43 Of those, 89 were in the Sharpsburg District, with 17 farmers and millers listed as enslavers.44 The 1850 agricultural schedule for David reveals that he had over 500 acres in cultivation with many animals. His Farm was valued at over $26,000.45 The slave schedule for that year shows that David Showman enslaved 14 workers, far more than the average in the Sharpsburg District.46 The Showman’s wealth in land and agriculture was reflected in the number of people the family kept in bondage. David died in 1858, leaving most of his estate to his eldest son, Raleigh. By 1860, the number of enslavers in the District had grown to 24 who held in bondage 86 enslaved workers. Raleigh and his brothers enslaved 12 workers, the largest number in the Sharpsburg District. Raleigh’s extensive landholdings in 1860 totaled over 700 acres according to the 1860 agricultural schedule and was the second largest in the Sharpsburg district. The ages of the Showman’s enslaved workers ranged from 3 to 60, which may demonstrate family groupings.47 Research providing more 39 "Antietam National Battlefield National Register Nomination," National Park Service, accessed April 21, 2023, https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/66000038. 40 “Legacy of Slavery in Maryland: Maryland Census Data 1820,” Legacy of Slavery in Maryland, accessed May 14, 2023, https://slavery.msa.maryland.gov/html/research/census1820.html. 41 “Legacy of Slavery in Maryland: Maryland Census Data 1840,” Legacy of Slavery in Maryland, accessed May 14, 2023, https://slavery.msa.maryland.gov/html/research/census1840.html. 42 "1850 Agricultural Census," United States Department of Agriculture, accessed January 31, 2023, https://agcensus.library.cornell.edu/census_year/1850-census/. 43 1850 Slave Schedule, https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/8055/?count=50&residence=_sharpsburg-washington-maryland-usa_6806&fh=1400&fsk=MDsxMzk5OzUwl. 44 "Antietam National Battlefield National Register Nomination," National Park Service, accessed April 21, 2023, https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/66000038. 45 “Legacy of Slavery in Maryland: Maryland Census Data 1850,” Legacy of Slavery in Maryland, accessed May 14, 2023, https://slavery.msa.maryland.gov/html/research/census1850.html. 46 1850 Slave Schedule, https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/8055/?count=50&residence=_sharpsburg- washington-maryland-usa_6806&fh=1400&fsk=MDsxMzk5OzUw. 47 Ibid. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 42 information on the Showmans and their enslaved workers should be continued beyond this point as possible information may exist in the Washington County Deed records. The Showman Family 1842-1905 David Showman was already a prosperous local farmer when he bought the land that became Antietam Farm in 1842. He purchased 255 acres from the Antietam Iron Works for $13,931.67, payable in two installments, one in October and one in December.48 The Showman family had been landowners in the area since at least 1783 when John Showman (David’s grandfather) purchased 330 acres of land called Showman’s Forest, adjacent to the northern end of Elk Ridge (owned by the Antietam Iron Works) on the wagon road heading from Jacob Hess’ Mill to Harpers Ferry on the Potomac River.49 David’s father, George, purchased a tract of land in 1807 called Showman’s Purchase.50 It is evident from the numerous Showman transactions in the Washington County real estate records between 1813 and 1863 that the Showmans purchased and sold property regularly. There are 45 records relating to David Showman alone between 1813 and 1858, when he died. These records include deeds, mortgages, bills of sale for animals, and enslaved workers. In 1824 David Showman purchased a portion of his father-in-law’s estate. David’s wife, Keziah, was the daughter of Solomon Dedie, who had previously bought land from the iron works. David, Keziah, and her family lived in a large stone house on Dedie’s property. Upon Solomon’s death, he appointed his executors to sell the land for $50 an acre; if it couldn’t be sold, rent it out for two years.51 Evidently no one was willing to pay Dedie’s price as it was nine years after Dedie’s death that David purchased his father-in-law’s acreage at $32.75 an acre for 255 acres.52 He, Keziah, and their five children, Eliza, Alfred, Upton, Otho, and Raleigh, made the large stone house on the property their home. The 1840 census confirms this, with the Showmans living under one roof with seven family members and 12 enslaved workers. Three of Showman’s sons were listed as between 20-29.53 The 1850 census shows that the Showman family still lived under one roof. David owned real estate valued at $26,000, and his son Raleigh, who was 37, had real estate valued at $15,000.54 Even though the Showmans are listed as living in one house, it is 48 Washington County Deeds WCDB zz:670 and 690. 49 "Tracey Patent/tract Index and Map Locations For Carroll, Frederick, and Washington Counties, Msa_scm13085- 0226," Mdhistory.net Index.html, accessed May 14, 2023, https://mdhistory.msa.maryland.gov/tracey_fr_wa_cr/html/msa_scm13085-0226.html. 50 Ibid. 51 "Last Will and Testament of Solomon Dedie," FamilySearch.org, accessed May 14, 2023, https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33S7-9YMX-DYJ?i=191&wc=SNYZ-16F%3A146536101%2C150058501&cc=1803986. 52 Washington County Deeds HH 201. 53 "1840 Agricultural Census," United State Department of Agriculture, accessed January 31, 2023, https://agcensus.library.cornell.edu/census_year/1840-census/. 54 "Agricultural and Manufacturing Census Records of Fifteen Southern States for the Years 1850, 1860, 1870, and 1880 [microform] [Maryland] : United States. Bureau of the Census. Internet Archive," Internet Archive, accessed May 1, 2023, https://archive.org/details/mdu-histmss-057648/page/n33/mode/2up. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 43 surmised that Raleigh was residing at Antietam Farm by 1850. It is hard to reconcile that Raleigh has real estate valued at such a sum in 1850 without using Antietam Farm as his headquarters, and it seems likely that Antietam Farm was built for him. David Showman died intestate in 1858, leaving an estate of 700 acres to his daughter and four sons. Upton Showman also died intestate in 1858, and his interest in the estate went to his three brothers and sister. In 1859, Eliza, David Showman’s daughter, now married, conveyed her part of the estate to her three brothers – Raleigh, Alfred, and Otho.55 The 1860 census shows Keziah Showman, David’s widow, owned real property valued at $7,350 and personal property valued at $1,000. Raleigh Showman, aged 46, had real estate valued at $31,510 and a personal estate valued at $6,665. According to census records, Otho Showman, also listed as living in the same house as Keziah, shows no real estate or personal property.56 Keziah and Otho lived at the Home Farm adjacent to Antietam Farm. At the same time, it is believed that Raleigh lived at Antietam Farm. The 1850 and 1860 Agricultural Schedule for Sharpsburg reveals the wealth of the Showman family and the combined resources of the Home Farm and Antietam Farm. Between 1850 and 1860, the Showman farms almost doubled in value, with much of the increase coming from livestock and the production of Indian corn, butter, and hay. This paralleled Washington County, whose 1850 agricultural census indicated over 159,851 acres of improved land and less than half of that in unimproved land. The cash value of farms was over $8 million, eclipsed only by Frederick and Baltimore counties.57 The output of Washington County’s farms was constantly in the top three of all Maryland counties in terms of value, livestock, and production. Wheat, rye, wool, milk cows, horses, swine, hay, and butter all played an essential role in the county’s agricultural economy.58 By the 1860 agricultural census, improved land had jumped almost 20% to just under 200,000 acres, while the cash value of farms rose to nearly $12 million. 55 Susan Frye, History and Architectural Analysis of the Mills House, (1988), 2. 56 1860 Agricultural Census," United States Department of Agriculture, accessed January 31, 2023, https://agcensus.library.cornell.edu/census_year/1860-census/. 57 "Agricultural and Manufacturing Census Records of Fifteen Southern States for the Years 1850, 1860, 1870, and 1880 [microform] [Maryland], 5. 58 Ibid. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 44 Figure 18: 1859 Map of Sharpsburg area with D. Showman’s land highlighted. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 45 Table 3: 1850 and 1860 Agricultural Schedule for the Showman Family59 1850 Agricultural Schedule David Showman 1860 Agricultural Schedule Raleigh Showman Improved Acres 500 520 Unimproved Acres 200 180 Cash Value of Farm $26,000 $38,860 Value of Farming Implements 500 500 Horses 15 28 Milk Cows 12 20 Other Cattle 50 120 Sheep 60 130 Swine 40 90 Value of Livestock 1500 3465 Wheat, Bushels of 3000 3000 Rye, Bushels of 100 150 Indian Corn, Bushels of 800 2000 Oats, Bushels of 100 100 Wool, lbs of 300 600 Irish Potatoes, lbs of 100 300 Value of Orchard Products by the $ 20 Butter, lbs of 300 1000 Hay, Tons of 8 75 Clover Seed, Bushels of 10 15 Value of Animals Slaughtered 400 810 Raleigh married Elizabeth Piper in November 1860 after the 1860 census. She was the daughter of Henry Piper and Elizabeth Keedy of Sharpsburg. No census records indicate where Raleigh and Elizabeth lived or who with before 1870. The couple lost an infant son in early 1862, and by September of that year, Elizabeth was once again pregnant. On September 17th, 1862, war came to Sharpsburg, disrupting the orderly and seasonal flow of life for its citizens. Confederate General Robert E. Lee made his stand in and around the town to salvage his Maryland campaign. Union General McClellan’s Army of the Potomac attacked Lee’s left flank in and around Miller’s cornfield north of town in the early morning of the 17th. According to one observer, “Every stalk of corn in the northern and greater part of the field was cut as closely as could have been done with a knife, and the slain lay in rows precisely as they 59 "Agricultural and Manufacturing Census Records of Fifteen Southern States for the Years 1850, 1860, 1870, and 1880 [microform] [Maryland]. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 46 had stood in their ranks a few moments before. It was never my fortune to witness a more bloody dismal battlefield.”60 The battle continued throughout the day as casualties mounted on both sides. Over 23,000 men were wounded, killed, or missing in action when the fighting ceased that night. The battle at Sharpsburg was the bloodiest single day in American history. The next day, both armies buried their dead and began the arduous task of caring for their wounded. Finally, on the night of September 18th, Lee and his army slipped across the river to Shepherdstown, Virginia, leaving the Union Army and the inhabitants of Sharpsburg to deal with the horrors left behind. 60 "Antietam," American Battlefield Trust, accessed May 5, 2023, https://www.battlefields.org/learn/civil-war/battles/antietam. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 47 Figure 19: Map showing location of Home and Antietam Farms and the area of fighting at Antietam. Map from 1894 War Records Atlas. Antietam Farm was too far away from the fierce fighting to be directly affected by it. However, the Home Farm and Antietam Farm residents would have heard the sound of the Battle. Antietam Farm, however, was impacted tremendously by the aftermath of the Battle. Contingents of the Union Army spent at least two weeks in the Antietam Valley while the hospitals caring for the Area of Fighting Home Farm Antietam Farm United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 48 wounded and dying of both armies lingered on for six months. Due to logistical issues, supplies, including food, shoes, clothing, medicine, and blankets, did not arrive for the Union Army after the battle. On September 22nd, Union General McClellan wrote, The entire army has been greatly exhausted by unavoidable overwork, hunger, and want of sleep and rest. When the army recrossed the Potomac the means of transportation at my disposal was inadequate to furnish a single day’s supply of subsistence in advance. 61 In addition to the supply issues, new reinforcements increased the strain on supply lines. Over 12,000 men of the Union Army’s IX Corps camped along Mills Road and surrounding Antietam Farm, helping themselves to the bounty around them. In his book When Hell Came to Sharpsburg, author Stephen Cowie states, Based on the losses reported, McClellan’s army allegedly shot down so many farm animals after the Battle that Sharpsburg’s citizens may have wondered if skirmishing had returned to the area. For example, William M. Blackford claimed the loss of 66 head of livestock, which were taken by the ‘Pennsylvania Corn Exchange Regiment, Martin’s Battery, and others.’ Blackford testified that the AOP’s ‘supply trains did not get up for a couple of days, and during that time they used this stock as rations for the soldiers… all these animals were butchered on my premises and fed to the troops.62 The Showman’s Home Farm and Antietam Farm were one mile apart along Mills Road. The Home Farm, where Keziah Showman and her son Otho lived, became Union General McClellan’s headquarters after the Battle, while Antietam Farm, the home of Raleigh and Elizabeth Showman, became the headquarters of General Burnside. The History of the 35th Regiment Massachusetts Volunteers 1862-1865 recollected, On the twenty-sixth we moved by way of the Ironworks to the more level ground on the east side of the Antietam and went into regular camp near a brick house, making shelters of rails and corn stalks. Our first grand review of the Ninth Army Corps was held October 3rd, in the fields north of our campground, the President, Lincoln himself, riding past, accompanied by Generals McClellan, Burnside and others – all smiling and apparently on the best of terms with each other.63 Edward O. Lord, the historian of the Ninth New Hampshire, wrote, 61 Steven Cowie, When Hell Came to Sharpsburg: The Battle of Antietam and its Impact on the Civilians Who Called it Home (SC: Savas Beatie, 2022), 166-167. 62 Ibid, 177. 63 United States. Army. Massachusetts Infantry Regiment; 35th, History of the Thirty-Fifth Regiment Massachusetts Volunteers, 1862-1865: With a Roster (Boston, MA: Mills, Knight and Co., 1884), 57. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 49 Since our last Battle we have been leading a rather quiet life as far as outward demonstrations go and have done more to perfect ourselves in discipline and drill than in six weeks previous. We can now do some things on the line ‘right smart,’ as the natives say here. President Lincoln has been here for two days. Night before last he was at Burnside’s quarters, distant about twenty rods, and last night at McClellan’s.64 Lord also reminisced about the scene around Antietam Farm’s house and looking north. As far as the eye could reach the fields were dotted over with white tents… Near the several camps were the baggage and supply trains, the wagons arranged in line with military precision, and surrounded by a circle of noisy, hungry mules… In the neighboring wood were the numerous camps of the cavalry. Under the soft, white light of the moon the scene took on a touch of romance which was not wholly lost when the campfire burned brightly and each tent displayed its bit of candle.65 Civilians in and around Sharpsburg who lost resources to the Union Army during and after the battle presented claims to the Federal government for compensation. Raleigh Showman presented a claim for Antietam Farm and the Home Farm, showing his losses. It detailed the damage/losses incurred because of the 10-day encampment by Union troops under General Ambrose Burnside’s command, September 24th to October 6th, 1862. Claim No 3; Record Group 94, F-1182 itemized the losses: 531 panels post and rail fence @ $1.50 each $ 796.50 2556 panels worm fence @ $ .80 each $1644.00 20 acres clover seed @ $6.00/bushel $ 820.00 20 acres timothy pasture @ $3.50/acre $ 70.00 184 acres of clover pasture @ $2.00/acre $ 368.00 100 acres deprived of seeding @ $6.75/acre $ 675.00 30 Locust Trees $ 30.00 100 bushels wheat destroyed in straw @ $1.40/bushel $ 140.00 2 large gates destroyed $ 70.00 Lumber & Sawmill taken away $ 25.00 30 bushels stone coal for blacksmith’s shop $ 15.00 250 shingles @ $1.00/for 100 $ 2.50 1 ½ acre of timber destroyed by signal corps $ 30.00 Otho Showman testified in 1877 that “184 acres of clover was pastured by beef and cattle belonging to the army. … the animals belonging to the cavalry were also turned in upon it and 64 Edward O. Lord, History of the Ninth Regiment, New Hampshire Volunteers in the War of the Rebellion (1895),152`. 65 Leslie Clark, Research Notes, (SC, 2005). United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 50 that it was entirely consumed.”66 The claim said that Raleigh Showman owned and lived on the Farm from which property was taken in October and November 1862 and that the Farm was about 250 acres, of which 200 acres was cleared and under fence. On April 15th, 1876, an affidavit from Jacob F. Miller and Daniel Piper, neighbors of Raleigh Showman, stated that General Burnside’s command encamped on the Farm of Raleigh Showman and that the Farm was situated some two miles from the battlefield.67 Showman also claimed damages on other tracts of land he owned, including the Farry Tract, farmed by tenant Alfred Hoffman, and another parcel of about 400 acres tenanted and farmed by Martin Slifer. These other claims included: 15 acres of corn @ $ .40/bushels per acre 21 Hogs @ 223 pounds each 24 Shoats @ 60 pounds each 1 sow and piglets 26 Fat Sheep 38 Cords of Wood @ 2.50/cord68 Raleigh Showman’s claims totaled over $8,000. His settlement from the U.S. Treasury was just $1,422.84 in 1879, paid 16 years after his death.69 In the winter and early spring of 1863, a typhoid epidemic swept through Sharpsburg due to mixing human waste and decaying bodies with groundwater. Local doctor A.A. Biggs kept a diary of his patients. The journal notes that on March 29th, 1863, Raleigh Showman was taken ill and treated with “calomel, colchichum, phosphate, ammonia, cal et opii, and turpentine, none proved effective. Raleigh Showman succumbed to illness on April 8th, leaving his pregnant wife, Elizabeth Piper Showman.”70 Elizabeth gave birth to a son, Raleigh Showman, on May 13th, 1863. It is not known if Elizabeth continued to live at Antietam Farm after her husband died. The 1870 census shows her living with her parents. Her brother-in-law Otho appears to be living with his brother, Alfred at another location, not Sharpsburg. Both are listed as farmers. Her brother-in-law Otho Showman’s death in 1877 led to an equity case between Elizabeth, who had remarried by then, and the remaining Showman brother Alfred and his wife. The Showman estate at that time was valued at over $81,854. The estate was divided into three parcels, the first to Alfred and his wife as their property, the second to Alfred as a life tenant, and the third to Elizabeth’s son Raleigh Showman. Antietam Farm and 173 acres formed part of Alfred’s life estate.71 66 Steven Cowie, When Hell Came to Sharpsburg: The Battle of Antietam and its Impact on the Civilians Who Called it Home (SC: Savas Beatie, 2022), 253. 67 Dennis Frye, Showman Family Claims, (National Archives, SC, n.d). 68 Ibid. 69 Treasury Settlement # 5487, National Archives. 70 Steven Cowie, When Hell Came to Sharpsburg: The Battle of Antietam and its Impact on the Civilians Who Called it Home (SC: Savas Beatie, 2022), 339. 71 Susan Frye, History and Architectural Analysis of the Mills House, (1988). United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 51 Alfred Showman died in July 1904, leaving his estate to his wife, Caroline, and their four children. His heirs felt that the estate was too complex to be divided equally, so they petitioned the court to sell the land and split the proceeds among themselves. Antietam Farm and its 173 acres were put up for sale in 1905. The Hagerstown Mail public sale advertisement stated, The first parcel being all those lands lying along the public road running from Sharpsburg to Harper’s Ferry, about three miles south of Sharpsburg and one and a half miles from the C & O Canal, adjoining the lands of Raleigh Showman and part of the lands which passed under the last will of Otho Showman. This track contains 173 acres more or less, of limestone lands and is in a high state of cultivation. The improvements consist of a large brick dwelling containing ten rooms, a brick and frame bank barn 45 x 100 feet, wagon shed, corn crib, icehouse, smokehouse, and other necessary outbuildings. There are also two tenant houses on the Farm. The lands are well watered, there being an artesian well, a never failing spring of water with spring house and another good well and the lands lie along the Antietam Creek.72 Snyder Family 1905 – 1920 James Snyder purchased Antietam Farm in 1905. He was a lifelong citizen of Sharpsburg and a well-respected businessman in grain and coal, according to the 1910 census.73 Snyder held the contract for building the road from the Antietam train station to the National Cemetery in Sharpsburg and had a similar contract for the National Cemetery in Fredericksburg, VA.74 He also built the tour roads around what would become the Antietam National Battlefield.75 Mr. Snyder left the Farm to his children, who sold the now 270-acre parcel to Noah Mills in 1920 for $13,000. Mills Family 1920-1988 Noah Mills, a veteran of World War 1, was born near Sharpsburg in 1889. According to the 1930 census, he is listed as a farmer and employed other workers. He began a successful dairy operation at Antietam Farm, which his descendants continued. In 1947, Noah and Mabel Mills put the Farm, now called “Frieze Farm,” containing 261.09 acres of land, into a trusteeship with other parcels of land they owned.76 In 1957, Mabel Mills, now a widow, granted joint tenancy to her son George.77 In 1967, George’s wife Alice was also added as a joint tenant.78 Then, in 1975, 72 Hagerstown Mail, February 17, 1905, https://newspaperarchive.com/hagerstown-mail-feb-17-1905-p-4/. 73 Thomas J. Williams, A History of Washington County, Maryland: From the Earliest Settlements to the Present Time, Including a History of Hagerstown (Baltimore: Regional Publishing Company, 1968), Vol 2 p 845. 74 Brian Downey, "The Antietam Observation Tower and the Birth of the Park," Antietam on the Web, December 1, 2018, https://behind.aotw.org/2018/12/01/the-antietam-observation-tower-and-the-birth-of-the-park/. 75 Ibid. 76 Washington County, MD Deeds, Liber 242, Folio 390-391. 77 Washington County, MD Deeds, Liber 331, Folio 451-454. 78 Washington County, MD Deeds, Liber 460, Folio 595-596. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 52 Mabel, George, and Alice established a partnership called “Gum Tree Farms.”79 In 1983, Earl E. Mills and his wife Kimberly bought into the partnership for $112,600.80 Mabel Mills is not listed in this deed, as she died in 1979. Figure 20: 1950s aerial view of Antietam Farm. Courtesy Dennis Frye. Dennis and Sylvia Frye In 1986, the remaining Mills family ended their partnership in Gum Tree Farms. In July 1988, they sold 220 acres and improvements to developer Richard Willis for $310,000.00. Later that year, Willis sectioned off part of the property that contained the brick house and 11 acres of land 79 Washington County, MD Deeds, Liber 597, Folio 710-717. 80 Washington County, MD Deeds, Liber 737, Folio 854-856. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Section 8 page 53 and sold it to Dennis Frye. The Frye’s purchased an additional 63 acres across Mills Road in 2004, including the original wagon shed and bank barn that were part of Antietam Farm. The Frye’s currently raise beef cattle. Antietam Farm has remained a farm since David Showman first bought it in 1842. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 54 ______________________________________________________________________________ 9. Major Bibliographical References Bibliography (Cite the books, articles, and other sources used in preparing this form.) “1840 Agricultural Census.” United State Department of Agriculture. Accessed January 31st, 2023. https://agcensus.library.cornell.edu/census_year/1840-census/. “1850 Agricultural Census.” United States Department of Agriculture. Accessed January 31st, 2023. https://agcensus.library.cornell.edu/census_year/1850-census/. “1860 Agricultural Census.” United States Department of Agriculture. Accessed January 31st, 2023. https://agcensus.library.cornell.edu/census_year/1860-census/. “About the National Register Process.” Maryland Historical Trust. Accessed November 16th, 2022. https://mht.maryland.gov/research_nationalregisterprocess.shtml. “Agricultural and Manufacturing Census Records of Fifteen Southern States for the Years 1850, 1860, 1870, and 1880 [microform] [Maryland] : United States. Bureau of the Census. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive.” Internet Archive. Accessed May 1st, 2023. https://archive.org/details/mdu-histmss-057648/page/n33/mode/2up. “The American Builder’s Companion : Or, A System of Architecture, Particularly Adapted to the Present Style of Building ; Illustrated with Seventy Copperplate Engravings : Benjamin, Asher, 1773-1845 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive.” Internet Archive. Accessed May 1st, 2023. https://archive.org/details/americanbuilders00benj/page/38/mode/2up. “Antietam National Battlefield National Register Nomination.” National Park Service. Accessed April 21st, 2023. https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/66000038. “Antietam.” American Battlefield Trust. Accessed May 5th, 2023. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/civil-war/battles/antietam. Candelaria, Brianna. A Cultural Landscape Study to Determine Eligibility of a Local Farm Under Criteria C for the National Register. Sharpsburg, MD, 2023. Clark, Leslie. Research Notes. SC, 2005. Cowie, Steven. When Hell Came to Sharpsburg: The Battle of Antietam and its Impact on the Civilians Who Called it Home. SC: Savas Beatie, 2022. Downey, Brian. “The Antietam Observation Tower and the Birth of the Park.” Antietam on the Web (blog). December 1st, 2018. https://behind.aotw.org/2018/12/01/the-antietam-observation- tower-and-the-birth-of-the-park/. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 55 Ellis, Ted. Roads of Colonial Western Maryland. Middletown, DE, 2019. Ensminger, Robert F. The Pennsylvania Barn: Its Origin, Evolution, and Distribution in North America. Baltimore, SC: JHU Press, 2003. Frye, Dennis. Personal Interview. Sharpsburg, MD, April 8th, 2023. Frye, Dennis. Showman Family Claims. National Archives, SC, n.d. Frye, Susan. History and Architectural Analysis of the Mills House. 1988. Frye, Susan W. “Evolution of mill settlement patterns in the Antietam drainage, Washington County, Maryland.” Master’s thesis, College of William and Mary - Arts and Sciences, 1984. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-ce0b-rb67. Frye, Sylvia. “A Restoration Challenge.” Ranger: The Journal of the Association of National Park Rangers 5, no. 7 (Fall 2000). Griffith, Dennis, James Thackara, and J. Vallance. “Map of the State of Maryland Laid Down from an Actual Survey of All the Principal Waters, Public Roads, and Divisions of the Counties Therein; Describing the Situation of the Cities, Towns, Villages, Houses of Worship and Other Public Buildings, Furnaces, Forges, Mills, and Other Remarkable Places; and of the Federal Territory; As Also a Sketch of the State of Delaware Shewing the Probable Connexion of the Chesapeake and Delaware Bays.” The Library of Congress. Accessed April 21st, 2023. https://www.loc.gov/item/76693265/. “A Guide to the National Register of Historic Places.” @SavingPlaces | National Trust for Historic Preservation. Accessed November 16th, 2022. https://savingplaces.org/story-categories/national-register-guide-stories#.Y3WD63bMJD8. “Gum Tree Farm, WA-II-371.” Maryland Historical Trust. Accessed November 16th, 2022. https://mht.maryland.gov/secure/medusa/mapintermediate.aspx?ID=21815&ID1=21815&ID2=u ndefined&Section=archInv&PropertyID=21815&selRec=archInv. Hagerstown Mail (Hagerstown, MD). February 17th, 1905, 4. https://newspaperarchive.com/hagerstown-mail-feb-17-1905-p-4/. Lake, Griffing, and Stevenson. “An Illustrated Atlas of Washington County, Maryland.” H.J. Toudy. 1877. https://jscholarship.library.jhu.edu/bitstream/handle/1774.2/32766/p.53%20Sharpsburg.jpg?sequence=41&isAllowed=y. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 56 “Last Will and Testament of Solomon Dedie.” FamilySearch.org. Accessed May 14th, 2023. https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33S7-9YMX-DYJ?i=191&wc=SNYZ- 16F%3A146536101%2C150058501&cc=1803986. “Legacy of Slavery in Maryland: Maryland Census Data 1820.” Legacy of Slavery in Maryland. Accessed May 14th, 2023. https://slavery.msa.maryland.gov/html/research/census1820.html. “Legacy of Slavery in Maryland: Maryland Census Data 1850.” Legacy of Slavery in Maryland. Accessed May 14th, 2023. https://slavery.msa.maryland.gov/html/research/census1850.html. Lord, Edward O. History of the Ninth Regiment, New Hampshire Volunteers in the War of the Rebellion. 1895. McAlester, Virginia, and Arcie L. McAlester. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1984. McClelland, Linda, J. Timothy Keller, Genevieve Keller, and Robert Melnick. Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1999. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB30-Complete.pdf. National Park Service. Guidelines for Completing National Register of Historic Places Form. Government Printing Office, 1997. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB16A-Complete.pdf. National Park Service. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Government Printing Office, 1997. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB- 15_web508.pdf. O’Donnell, Eleanor. Researching a Historic Property. Government Printing Office, 1991. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB39-Complete.pdf. Pfueller Davidson, Lisa, and Catherine C. Lavoie. Buildings of Maryland. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press, 2022. Schooley, Pat. “Undoing 150 Years to Reveal Past in Burnside’s Headquarters.” The Herald Mail (Hagerstown, MD), May 19th, 2013, C. Schooley, Patricia. Architectural and Historic Treasures of Washington County, Maryland. Hagerstown, MD: Phoenix Color, 2002. Scott, Gary. The Philip Pry House, Headquarters of Major General George B. McClellan. Antietam National Battlefield: Antietam National Battlefield, 1980. https://core.tdar.org/document/165961/historic-structures-report-the-philip-pry-house-headquarters-of-major-general-george-b-mc-clellan-antietam-nb. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 57 Taggert, Thomas, and S.S. Downin. “A Map of Washington Co., Maryland. Exhibiting the Farms, Election Districts, Towns, Villages, Roads, Etc., Etc. 1859.” The Library of Congress. Accessed April 21st, 2023. https://www.loc.gov/item/2002624033/. “The Torch Light and Public Advertiser March 10th 1831, Page Page 2.” Historical Newspapers from 1700s-2000s - Newspapers.com. Accessed May 14th, 2023. https://www.newspapers.com/image/39377342/. Thompson, M. D. The iron industry in western Maryland. 1976. “Tracey Patent/tract Index and Map Locations ForCarroll, Frederick, and Washington Counties,, Msa_scm13085-0226.” Mdhistory.net Index.html. Accessed May 14th, 2023. https://mdhistory.msa.maryland.gov/tracey_fr_wa_cr/html/msa_scm13085-0226.html. United States. Army. Massachusetts Infantry Regiment; 35th. History of the Thirty-Fifth Regiment Massachusetts Volunteers, 1862-1865: With a Roster. Boston, MA: Mills, Knight and Co., 1884. “Vernacular Architecture: The Characteristics That Give It Shape.” Homedit. Last modified January 3rd, 2023. https://www.homedit.com/house-styles/vernacular-architecture/#:~:text=Architects%20and%20historians%20value%20the%20way%20vernacular %20architecture,sustainable%20structures%20they%20can%20base%20in%20local%20tradition . Walker, Kevin M., K. C. Kirkman, and Western Maryland Interpretive Association. Antietam Farmsteads: A Guide to the Battlefield Landscape. 2010. Wallace, Edie. “Slave Resistance at Antietam Iron Works.” Tolsons Chapel. Last modified May 14th, 2019. https://tolsonschapel.org/2019/05/14/slave-resistance-at-antietam-iron-works/. Williams, Thomas J. A History of Washington County, Maryland: From the Earliest Settlements to the Present Time, Including a History of Hagerstown, 2nd ed. Baltimore: Regional Publishing Company, 1968. Winter, Susan E. “Mill Settlement Patterns Along the Antietam Creek Drainage, Washington County, Maryland.” Spatial Patterning in Historical Archaeology: Selected Studies of Settlement, 1994, 28. Wyatt, Barbara. The Components of Historic Context. National Park Service, 2009. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 58 ___________________________________________________________________________ Previous documentation on file (NPS): ____ preliminary determination of individual listing (36 CFR 67) has been requested ____ previously listed in the National Register ____ previously determined eligible by the National Register ____ designated a National Historic Landmark ____ recorded by Historic American Buildings Survey #____________ ____ recorded by Historic American Engineering Record # __________ ____ recorded by Historic American Landscape Survey # ___________ Primary location of additional data: __X__ State Historic Preservation Office ____ Other State agency ____ Federal agency ____ Local government ____ University ____ Other Name of repository: _MIHP # WA-II-371____________________________________ Historic Resources Survey Number (if assigned): _MIHP# WA-II-371_______________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 10. Geographical Data Acreage of Property ____75___________ Use either the UTM system or latitude/longitude coordinates Latitude/Longitude Coordinates Datum if other than WGS84:__________ (enter coordinates to 6 decimal places) West side of Mills Rd. East side of Mills Rd. Lat.: 39.418152 Long.: -77.729376 Lat.: 39.417846 Long.: -77.726378 Lat.: 39.416511 Long.: -77.729988 Lat.: 39.415214 Long.: -77.727782 Lat.: 39.415964 Long.: -77.727466 Lat.: 39.414327 Long.: -77.718973 Lat.: 39.417514 Long.: -77.726640 Lat.: 39.417540 Long.: -77.718685 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 59 Verbal Boundary Description (Describe the boundaries of the property.) West Side of Mills Road – Farmhouse Beginning at a point in the center line of Mills Road, said point being located South 75 degrees. 19 minutes East, 312.07 feet and South 15 degrees 02 minutes 57 seconds West, 100.00 feet respectively from the end of the second line of the lands conveyed to George A. Mills and Alice E. Mills, his wife, and Earl E. Mills and Kimberly L. Mills, his wife, to Richard A. Willis by deed dated July 8th, 1988, and recorded in Liber 882, folio 436, among the Land Records od Washington County, Maryland. Thence continuing with the center line of Mills Road South 15 degrees 02 minutes 57 seconds West, 244.32 feet to a point, thence leaving said road and running along the remaining lands of Richard Willis (Liber 882, folio 436) North 75 degrees 03 minutes 52 seconds West, 800.00 feet to an iron pin set, thence along the same North 20 degrees 07 minutes 31 seconds East, 598.21 feet to an iron pin set, thence along the same South 75 degrees 03 minutes 52 seconds East 800.00 feet to the place of beginning; CONTAINING 11.09 acres of land, more or less. East Side of Mills Road – Barn, Wagon Shed, Pasture BEGINNING at a post along the East side of Mills Road, said post being located at the end of the third (or South 75 degrees 19 minutes East 330.00 feet) line of the lands conveyed by George A. Mills and Alice E, Mills, his wife and Earl E. Mills and Kimberly L. Mills, his wife to Richard A, Willis by Deed dated July 8, 1988 and recorded in Liber 882, folio 436 among the Land Records of Washington County, Maryland, thence running with the fourth through the fourteenth lines of the above-mentioned deed South 84 degrees 55 minutes East 173.8 feet to a post, thence South 66 degrees 01 minute East 131.4 feet to a post, thence South 88 degrees 32 minutes East 785.53 feet to a post, thence North 4 degrees 54 minutes East 110.38 feet to a post, thence South 75 degrees 12 minutes East 307.0 feet to an Oak Tree, thence South 77 degrees 26 minutes East 277.0 feet to an Oak Tree, thence North 5 degrees 00 minutes West 18.0 feet to a post, thence South 73 degrees 49 minutes East 281.04 feet to an Oak Tree, thence South 71 degrees 41 minutes East 322.9 feet to a post, thence South 74 degrees 38 minutes East 434.62 feet to a point, thence South 17 degrees 06 minutes West 914.76 feet to an old corner fencepost, thence along lands heretofore conveyed by Richard A. Willis to Ronald Ingram and wife, North 77 degrees 06 minutes 58 seconds West 879.00.feet to an iron pin set, thence along the same South 9 degrees 36 minutes 52 seconds West 217.12 feet to an iron pin set, thence along the same North 75 degrees 59 minutes 04 seconds West 1094.3.7 feet to an iron pin set, thence along the sam7 South 18 degrees 53 minutes 00 seconds West 296.67 feet to an iron pin set, thence along other lands of Ronald Ingram and wife South 18 degrees 53 minutes 00 seconds West 346.31 feet to an iron pin set along the northern marginal line of Harpers Ferry Road, thence with said Harpers Ferry Road, North 59 degrees 49 minutes 00 seconds West 88.29 feet to a post, thence along the same North 73 degrees 52 minutes 00 seconds West 229.56 feet to a post, thence along the same North 80 degrees 03 minutes 00 seconds West 98.46 feet to a post, thence along the same South 84 degrees 34 minutes 00 seconds West 180.00 feet to a point, thence along the same South 89 degrees 22 minutes 00 seconds west 266.48 feet to a point, thence South 62 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West 51,64 feet to a point at the intersection of Mills Road, United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 60 thence along or near the center line of Mills Road North 22 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds East 149.65 feet to a pin nail set, thence along the same North 26 degrees 18 minutes 46 seconds East 157.72 feet to a point, thence along the same North 24 degrees 55 minutes 31 seconds East 453.21 feet to a point, thence North 26 degrees 17 minutes 23 seconds East 228,25 feet to a point, thence North 23 degrees 36 minutes 41 seconds East 355.50 feet to a point, thence North 15 degrees 02 minutes 57 seconds East 244.32 feet to a point, thence North 15 degrees 02 minutes 57 seconds East 100.00· feet to a point, thence leaving said road and running South 75 degrees 19 minutes 00 seconds East 17,93 feet to the place of beginning, containing 64.45 acres of land, more or less. Boundary Justification (Explain why the boundaries were selected.) The selected National Register boundaries encompass all historic resources associated with the historic significance of the property. ______________________________________________________________________________ 11. Form Prepared By name/title: _Brianna Candelaria ___________ organization: _University of Maryland – College Park ______ street & number: _P.O. Box 484_______ city or town: Sharpsburg________ state: _MD___ zip code:_21782__________ e-mail_themulegirl@yahoo.com_______________________________ telephone:_301-660-1800________________________ date:_05/04/2023____________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Additional Documentation United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 61 Map showing boundaries of proposed National Register property. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 62 Table of Figures Figure 1. USGS Map with location of Antietam Farm located on either side of Mills Road. Figure 2. First floor plan of house. Antietam Farm house plans courtesy of Leslie Clark. Figure 3. Second floor plan of house. Antietam Farm house plans courtesy of Leslie Clark. Figure 4. Attic of house. Antietam Farm house plans courtesy of Leslie Clark. Figure 5. Basement of house. Antietam Farm house plans courtesy of Leslie Clark. Figure 6. East side of farmhouse in 1988 before restoration. Photo by Dennis Frye Figure 7. South side of farmhouse in 1988 before restoration. Photo by Dennis Frye Figure 8. Farm outbuildings, East of main house across Mills Road as they appeared at time of purchase in 1988. Photo by Dennis Frye Figure 9. Interior view of farmhouse facing the front door with front parlor on left and dining room on right before restoration in 1988. Photo by Dennis Frye Figure 10. Interior view of the front and back parlor facing the back parlor. Before restoration in 1988. Photo by Dennis Frye Figure 11. Interior view of dining room with kitchen entrance to the right. Before restoration in 1988. Photo by Dennis Frye. Figure 12. Hoffman Farm – Courtesy of John Banks’ Civil War Blog. Figure 13, Mount Airy (Grove Farm) –Courtesy of the MD Historical Trust. Figure 14. Sherrick Farm – Courtesy of Preservation Maryland. Figure 15. Philip Pry Farm – Courtesy of NPS. Figure 16. Flour mills listed in the 1783 tax assessment (Drawn by Anne S. Beckett). Figure 17. Map of Sharpsburg area in 1794 showing the Antietam Iron Forge. Map courtesy of Library of Congress. Figure 18. 1859 Map of Sharpsburg area with D. Showman's land highlighted. Figure 19. Map showing location of Home and Antietam Farms and the area of fighting at Antietam. Map from 1894 War Records Atlas. Figure 20: 1950's ariel view of Antietam Farm. Courtesy Dennis Frye United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 63 Photo Log Name of Property: Antietam Farm City or Vicinity: Sharpsburg County: Washington State: Maryland Photographer: Brianna Candelaria Date Photographed: April 8 and May 7, 2023 Description of Photograph(s) and number, include description of view indicating direction of camera: 1 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0001) View of front (east) Façade of Antietam Farm Dwelling facing west 2 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0002) North side of Antietam Farm dwelling facing south. 3 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0003) West side of Antietam Farm dwelling facing east. 4 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0004) South side of Antietam Farm dwelling facing north. 5 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0005) Front façade portico facing west 6 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0006) South-facing view along Mills Rd. with Antietam Farm dwelling on the right and farm buildings on the left. 7 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0007) North-facing view along Mills Rd. with Antietam Farm dwelling on the left. 8 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0008) Southwest view of Antietam Farm dwelling and surrounding landscape showing the site’s rural character. 9 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0009) Western view of landscape, taken from west (rear) of the dwelling. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 64 10 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0010) Northern side of bank barn with double brick outsheds facing south 11 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0011) Closeup of decorative elements on western-most brick outshed facing south. 12 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0012) Western side of bank barn showing 1950’s era milking parlor facing east 13 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0013) Southern facing façade of wagon shed facing north 14 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0014) Southeastern side of wagon shed facing northwest. 15 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0015) Northeastern side of wagon shed facing southwest. 16 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0016) Southwestern view of bank barn and wagon shed. 17 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0017) Southeastern view from front of bank barn. 18 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0018) Interior view of southern wall in basement with original fireplace facing south 19 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0019) Interior view of basement window showing reproduction latticework as indicated by original facing east 20 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0020) Original stairs leading from basement to first floor facing west 21 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0021) Interior view of first-floor hallway facing west 22 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0022) Interior view of first-floor hallway facing east 23 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0023) Interior view of kitchen facing southeast 24 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0024) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 65 Interior view of dining room facing south 25 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0025) Interior view of back parlor facing west 26 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0026) Interior view of back parlor (left) and front parlor (right) facing north 27 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0027) Interior view of front parlor facing east 28 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0028) Interior view of original first-floor stairs to second floor facing west 29 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0029) Interior view of second-story landing facing northeast 30 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0030) Interior view of second-floor bedroom facing north 31 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0031) Interior view of second-floor bedroom facing northeast 32 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0032) Interior view of faint graffiti on attic landing facing northeast 33 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0033) Interior view of framing of dwelling 34 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0034) Interior view of framing of dwelling 35 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0035) Interior view of framing of dwelling 36 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0036) Interior view of framing of dwelling United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 66 Photographs 1 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0001) View of front (east) Façade of Antietam Farm Dwelling facing west United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 67 2 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0002) North side of Antietam Farm dwelling facing south. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 68 3 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0003) West side of Antietam Farm dwelling facing east. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 69 4 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0004) South side of Antietam Farm dwelling facing north. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 70 5 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0005) Front façade portico facing west United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 71 6 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0006) South-facing view along Mills Rd. with Antietam Farm dwelling on the right and farm buildings on the left. 7 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0007) North-facing view along Mills Rd. with Antietam Farm dwelling on the left. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 72 8 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0008) Southwest view of Antietam Farm dwelling and surrounding landscape showing the site’s rural character. 9 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0009) Western view of landscape, taken from west (rear) of the dwelling. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 73 10 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0010) Northern side of bank barn with double brick outsheds facing south 11 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0011) Closeup of decorative elements on western-most brick outshed facing south. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 74 12 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0012) Western side of bank barn showing 1950’s era milking parlor facing east 13 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0013) Southern facing façade of wagon shed facing north United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 75 14 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0014) Southeastern side of wagon shed facing northwest. 15 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0015) Northeastern side of wagon shed facing southwest. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 76 16 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0016) Southwestern view of bank barn and wagon shed. 17 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0017) Southeastern view from front of bank barn. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 77 18 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0018) Interior view of southern wall in basement with original fireplace facing south 19 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0019) Interior view of basement window showing reproduction latticework as indicated by original facing east United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 78 20 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0020) Original stairs leading from basement to first floor facing west United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 79 21 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0021) Interior view of first-floor hallway facing west United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 80 22 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0022) Interior view of first-floor hallway facing east United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 81 23 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0023) Interior view of kitchen facing southeast 24 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0024) Interior view of dining room facing south United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 82 25 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0025) Interior view of back parlor facing west 26 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0026) Interior view of back parlor (left) and front parlor (right) facing north United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 83 27 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0027) Interior view of front parlor facing east United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 84 28 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0028) Interior view of original first-floor stairs to second floor facing west United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 85 29 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0029) Interior view of second-story landing facing northeast United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 86 30 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0030) Interior view of second-floor bedroom facing north 31 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0031) Interior view of second-floor bedroom facing northeast United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 87 32 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0032) Interior view of faint graffiti on attic landing facing northeast 33 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0033) Interior view of framing of dwelling United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 88 34 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0034) Interior view of framing of dwelling 35 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0035) Interior view of framing of dwelling United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 Antietam Farm Washington County, MD Name of Property County and State Sections 9-end page 89 36 of 36 (MD_Washington_AntietamFarm_0036) Interior view of framing of dwelling Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: This information is being collected for nominations to the National Register of Historic Places to nominate properties for listing or determine eligibility for listing, to list properties, and to amend existing listings. Response to this request is required to obtain a benefit in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.460 et seq.). We may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Estimated Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for each response using this form is estimated to be between the Tier 1 and Tier 4 levels with the estimate of the time for each tier as follows: Tier 1 – 60-100 hours Tier 2 – 120 hours Tier 3 – 230 hours Tier 4 – 280 hours The above estimates include time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining data, and preparing and transmitting nominations. Send comments regarding these estimates or any other aspect of the requirement(s) to the Service Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service, 1201 Oakridge Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525. Maryland Historical Trust • 100 Community Place • Crownsville • Maryland • 21032 Tel: 410.697.9591 • toll free 877.767.6272 • TTY users: Maryland Relay • MHT.Maryland.gov Larry Hogan, Governor Boyd Rutherford, Lt. Governor Robert S. McCord, Secretary Sandy Schrader, Deputy Secretary May 26, 2022 Andrew Eshleman Washington County Department of Public Works 100 West Washington Street Hagerstown, MD 21740 Re: Price’s Bridge over Conococheague Creek Washington County, Maryland Dear Mr. Eshleman: The Maryland Historical Trust (Trust) has received an updated Determination of Eligibility (DOE) Form for Price’s Bridge (Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties No. WA-I-219). We understand that Washington County is currently considering treatment options for this County-owned bridge and is seeking the opinion of the Trust regarding the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) status of the bridge. We have reviewed the DOE form and are writing to provide our comments. Price’s Bridge was documented in 1975 and determined eligible for listing in the NRHP in 1994. The five-arch structure of native limestone was constructed in 1832 to span Conococheague Creek. Reportedly, it is one of the largest of the stone arched structures in Washington County. The bridge was erected at an established creek crossing location, thereby facilitating transportation on an already well travelled route and provided access to Price's Sawmill. The bridge is a significant example of the engineering abilities of the early 19th century builders and is one of the few bridges in the county for which the recorded specifications have been located. Flooding caused by Hurricane Agnes damaged the bridge in 1972 and it received temporary repairs to remain functional until a bypass bridge was completed in 1979. Since 1979, the bridge has been closed to traffic and has received no maintenance. The bridge is surrounded by private property and is not accessible by public roads. Despite the abandonment of the bridge and its diminished integrity, the bridge was determined eligible for the NRHP in 1994 under Criteria A and C for its contribution to commerce and transportation in Washington County and as an example of the engineering abilities of 19th century bridge builders. Due to the passage of time and continued deterioration of the structure since the previous DOE for the bridge, the ASC Group has prepared a new NRHP eligibility assessment on behalf of the Washington County Department of Public Works. The DOE is well prepared and will serve as a valuable addition to the Trust’s archival documentation of the structure. The DOE provides current photos of the bridge, highlights the structure’s deteriorating structural integrity, and recommends that it is no longer eligible for listing in the NRHP. We agree that the bridge’s character-defining elements are in fair to poor condition. However, the structure remains an impressive engineering example of stone arch bridge construction. It is the Trust’s opinion that the bridge retains sufficient integrity to represent its historic significance and it remains eligible for the NRHP. Washington County is an exemplary steward of its significant stone arch bridges and has spent considerable time and great expense preserving stone arch bridges on its local road network. We understand the many complex safety, administrative, environmental, and financial considerations to be addressed in planning for the future of this bridge. The Trust will work with Washington County to help find successful solutions that effectively balance project need and historic preservation interests. Mr. Andrew Eshleman Price’s Bridge Page 2 If you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact either Tim Tamburrino (for historic built environment) at tim.tamburrino@maryland.gov or Beth Cole (for archeology) at beth.cole@maryland.gov. Thank you for providing us this opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Elizabeth Hughes Director / State Historic Preservation Officer EH/TJT/EJC/202202368 cc: Benjamin A. Harvey (ASC Group) Record #Type MIHP#Record Status Status Date Task Name Comments 05-Apr-24 Historical Review Revise General Notes on page 3 regarding historical resources: The subject property contains or is directly adjacent to a historic resource documented on the Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties WA-I-482, Mason Dixon Milestone #103. Prior to any property grading or site work, this resource should be protected from disturbance with visual barriers. Also please show the Mason Dixon marker on all pages and reference general note to ensure protection of this resource during implementation of the site plan and building phase. Currently only shown on page 24 (Landscape Plan). 05-Apr-24 Historical Review Revise General Notes on page 3 regarding historical resources: The subject property contains or is directly adjacent to a historic resource documented on the Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties WA-I-482, Mason Dixon Milestone #103. Prior to any property grading or site work, this resource should be protected from disturbance with visual barriers. Also please show the Mason Dixon marker on all pages and reference general note to ensure protection of this resource during implementation of the site plan and building phase. Currently only shown on page 24 (Landscape Plan). 0 Status Date Task Name Comments 01-Apr-24 Historic District Commission Updated by Script from EPR. 01-Apr-24 Historic District Commission Missing full requested note. 4 Status Date Task Name Comments 01-Apr-24 Historic District Commission Updated by Script from EPR. 0 Status Date Task Name Comments 27-Mar-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 5 Status Date Task Name Comments 05-Apr-24 Historical Review 0 Status Date Task Name Comments 19-Apr-24 Historic District Commission Updated by Script from EPR. 3 Status Date Task Name Comments 15-Apr-24 Historic District Commission Updated by Script from EPR. 14 Status Date Task Name Comments 04-Apr-24 Historical Review Reviewed by the HDC at 4/3/24 meeting and approved. 04-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 15 Status Date Task Name Comments 19-Apr-24 Historic District Commission Updated by Script from EPR. 1 Status Date Task Name Comments Historic Review Activity 03/22/2024 thru 04/19/2024 Open Date Date Assigned Location Description Workflow Info 05-Apr-24 MASON DIXON RD AT CITICORP DRIVE HAGERSTOWN MD 21742 PROPOSED CONVENIENCE STORE Folder Status Note Revisions Required Days in Review: SP-22-026 Site Plan In Review 27-Jun-22 28-Mar-24 19964 COOL HOLLOW ROAD HAGERSTOWN, MD 21740 CREATE ONE 4.51 ACRE LOT WHICH IS LOT 3 WITH REPLAT OF LOT 1 WHICH IS THE REMAINING LANDS Folder Status Revisions Required Note Days in Review: S-23-039 Preliminary-Final Plat II0179 Revisions Required 26-Jul-23 01-Apr-24 12440 BURKHOLDER LANE HAGERSTOWN, MD 21740 MARTIN PROPERTY PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR LOT 1 Folder Status Approved Days in Review: S-23-058 Preliminary-Final Plat I336 In Review 26-Sep-23 22-Mar-24 SP-07-052.R01 14340 BANFILL AVENUE "MYSTICAL PAWS" CHANGE OF USE FROM MILITARY OFFICE TO PET GROOMING BUSINESS, ZONING CERTIFICATION FOR "MYSTICAL PAWS" TO TAKE OVER 1,368 SQ. FT. TO BE USED AS PET GROOMING BUSINESS, HOURS OF OPERATION: Folder Status Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-00554 Non-Residential Addition-Alteration Permit IV262 Approved 08-Feb-24 05-Apr-24 S-21-022 18651 KEEDYSVILLE ROAD, LOT 1 560 SQ. FT. FINISHED SPACE ONE STORY POOL HOUSE TO REAR OF EXISTING SWIMMING POOL TO INCLUDE FULL BATHROOM, BAR/LOUNGE AREA, REC ROOM, GYM AND CLOSET, 405 SQ. FT. PAVILION TO RIGHT OF POOL HOUSE,100 Folder Status Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-00644 Residential New Construction Permit II0251 Approved 13-Feb-24 16-Apr-24 17811 REIFF CHURCH ROAD HAGERSTOWN, MD 21740 CREATE A 10 ACRE LOT AROUND EXISTING FARM COMPLEX WITH 82.68 ACRES IN THE REMAINING LANDS Folder Status Approved Days in Review: S-24-004 Preliminary-Final Plat I261 In Review 27-Feb-24 01-Apr-24 11505 ASHTON ROAD CLEAR SPRING, MD 21722 CREATE A LOT AROUND EXISTING DEVELOPMENT FOR AN IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER Folder Status Approved Days in Review: S-24-005 Preliminary-Final Plat V090 Final Copies Due 01-Mar-24 20-Mar-24 LOR 13215 SMITHSBURG PIKE REPAIRS TO EXISTING 200 SQ. FT. COVERED PORCH TO INCLUDE REPLACING FLOORING, RAILINGS, AND POSTS AS NEEDED Folder Status Note Approved Days in Review: 2024-00996 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit IV029 Approved 06-Mar-24 18-Apr-24 11681 CEDAR RIDGE ROAD WILLIAMSPORT, MD 21795 CREATE .92 ACRE LOT FOR AN IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER Folder Status Approved Days in Review: S-24-006 Preliminary-Final Plat V248 In Review 12-Mar-24 1,059 SQ. FT. INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO Folder Status 01-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 01-Apr-24 Historical Review No HDC; interior and property is not on exterior review; MHT review only. 4 Status Date Task Name Comments 01-Apr-24 Historical Review No HDC; interior and property is not on exterior review; MHT review only. 01-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 4 Status Date Task Name Comments 01-Apr-24 Historical Review No HDC; interior and property is not on exterior review; MHT review only. 01-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 0 Status Date Task Name Comments 01-Apr-24 Historical Review No HDC; interior and property is not on exterior review; MHT review only. 01-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 4 Status Date Task Name Comments 01-Apr-24 Historical Review No HDC; interior and property is not on exterior review; MHT review only. 01-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 5 Status Date Task Name Comments 01-Apr-24 Historical Review No HDC; interior and property is not on exterior review; MHT review only. 01-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 5 Status Date Task Name Comments 01-Apr-24 Historical Review No HDC; interior and property is not on exterior review; MHT review only. 01-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 5 Status Date Task Name Comments 01-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 01-Apr-24 Historical Review No HDC; interior and property is not on exterior review; MHT review only. 5 Status Date Task Name Comments 01-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 01-Apr-24 Historical Review No HDC; interior and property is not on exterior review; MHT review only. 5 Status Date Task Name Comments 15-Apr-24 Historical Review The Pole Building is associated with a residential use on a property not contributing to the Charlton Rural Village and no HDC review is required per Pole Building Policy. 15-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 13 Status Date Task Name Comments 28-Mar-24 LOR 14446 ARGONNE AVENUE, BUILDING 111 EXISTING MILITARY SLEEPING BARRACK TO INCLUDE (1) BEDROOM, (1) FULL BATHROOM, KITCHEN, LIVING ROOM, AND MAINTENANCE CLOSET FORT RITCHIE, BUILDING 111 Passed - Info Note Days in Review: 2024-01407 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit IV262 Approved 27-Mar-24 28-Mar-24 LOR 14450 ARGONNE AVENUE, BUILDING 110 1,059 SQ. FT. INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING MILITARY SLEEPING BARRACK TO INCLUDE (1) BEDROOM, (1) FULL BATHROOM, KITCHEN, LIVING ROOM, AND MAINTENANCE CLOSET FORT RITCHIE, BUILDING 110 Folder Status Note Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-01408 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit IV262 Approved 27-Mar-24 01-Apr-24 LOR 14474 ARGONNE AVENUE, BUILDING 104 1,059 SQ. FT. INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING MILITARY SLEEPING BARRACK TO INCLUDE (1) BEDROOM, (1) FULL BATHROOM, KITCHEN, LIVING ROOM, AND MAINTENANCE CLOSET FORT RITCHIE, BUILDING 104 Folder Status Note Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-01415 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit IV262 Approved 27-Mar-24 28-Mar-24 LOR 14442 ARGONNE AVENUE, BUILDING 112 1,059 SQ. FT. INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING MILITARY SLEEPING BARRACK TO INCLUDE (1) BEDROOM, (1) FULL BATHROOM, KITCHEN, LIVING ROOM, AND MAINTENANCE CLOSET FORT RITCHIE, BUILDING 112 Folder Status Note Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-01405 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit IV262 Approved 27-Mar-24 27-Mar-24 LOR 14458 ARGONNE AVENUE, BUILDING 108 1,059 SQ. FT. INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING MILITARY SLEEPING BARRACK TO INCLUDE (1) BEDROOM, (1) FULL BATHROOM, KITCHEN, LIVING ROOM, AND MAINTENANCE CLOSET FORT RITCHIE, BUILDING 108 Folder Status Note Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-01411 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit IV262 Approved 27-Mar-24 27-Mar-24 LOR 14462 ARGONNE AVENUE, BUILDING 107 1,059 SQ. FT. INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING MILITARY SLEEPING BARRACK TO INCLUDE (1) BEDROOM, (1) FULL BATHROOM, KITCHEN, LIVING ROOM, AND MAINTENANCE CLOSET FORT RITCHIE, BUILDING 107 Folder Status Note Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-01412 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit IV262 Approved 27-Mar-24 27-Mar-24 LOR 14454 ARGONNE AVENUE, BUILDING 109 1,059 SQ. FT. INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING MILITARY SLEEPING BARRACK TO INCLUDE (1) BEDROOM, (1) FULL BATHROOM, KITCHEN, LIVING ROOM, AND MAINTENANCE CLOSET FORT RITCHIE, BUILDING 109 Folder Status Note Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-01410 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit IV262 Approved 27-Mar-24 27-Mar-24 LOR 14466 ARGONNE AVENUE, BUILDING 106 1,059 SQ. FT. INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING MILITARY SLEEPING BARRACK TO INCLUDE (1) BEDROOM, (1) FULL BATHROOM, KITCHEN, LIVING ROOM, AND MAINTENANCE CLOSET FORT RITCHIE, BUILDING 106 Folder Status Passed - Info Note Days in Review: 2024-01413 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit IV262 Approved 27-Mar-24 27-Mar-24 LOR 14470 ARGONNE AVENUE, BUILDING 105 1,059 SQ. FT. INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING MILITARY SLEEPING BARRACK TO INCLUDE (1) BEDROOM, (1) FULL BATHROOM, KITCHEN, LIVING ROOM, AND MAINTENANCE CLOSET FORT RITCHIE, BUILDING 105 Folder Status Passed - Info Note Days in Review: 2024-01414 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit IV262 Approved 27-Mar-24 02-Apr-24 S-21-044 11643 DAM NUMBER 5 ROAD 1,344 SQ. FT. POLE BUILDING ON CONCRETE SLAB TO REAR OF DWELLING WITH 448 SQ. FT. COVERED PORCH, TO BE USED AS A GARAGE, PRE-ENGINEERED ROOF TRUSSES FRANCESCO & JANE DICARLO Folder Status Note Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-01485 Residential New Construction Permit Review 01-Apr-24 Folder Status 15-Apr-24 Historical Review On MIHP and has undergone extensive additions and renovations in 2022. Not in an HDC review area. 15-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 7 Status Date Task Name Comments 15-Apr-24 Historical Review Property is in Mercersville which is not a surveyed district and it is unclear if this structure is the one referenced in the MIHP as Bikle House with additions. Either way solar is not reviewable in this area. Due to heavy modifications not sending no review contact on this one. 15-Apr-24 Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR. 3 Status Date Task Name Comments 18-Apr-24 Historical Review Property is on the MIHP and I have talked to Mr. Arena in the past regarding NR nomination and the resources on the property. Also, in Ag easement. It is not in an HDC review area, and this permit is for an ag structure which are not reviewable by the HDC so for those multiple reasons no HDC review is required. 0 Activity Count:22 Note Passed - Info Revisions Required010 0 1 0 1 0 1 11 10 0 2 3 0 1 0 1 15 15 2 08-Apr-24 LOR 8900 LUMS LANE 750 SQ. FT. IN GROUND SWIMMING POOL TO LEFT SIDE OF DWELLING, 2 FT. TO 9 FT. IN DEPTH Note Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-01584 Residential New Construction Permit II0235 Review 05-Apr-24 2024-01840 Non-Residential Ag Certificate V191 Review 18-Apr-24 12-Apr-24 S-22-024 6720 REMSBURG ROAD, LOT 1 INSTALLATION OF (37) 15.71 KW ROOF MOUNTED SOLAR PANELS ON DWELLING PHILIP BAKER-SHENK, LOT 1 Folder Status Note Passed - Info Days in Review: 2024-01711 Residential Addition- Alteration Permit II0103 Review 12-Apr-24 18-Apr-24 LOR 14847 FAIRVIEW ROAD 2,400 SQ. FT. POLE BUILDING ON CONCRETE SLAB FOR STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT AND TRACTORS Folder Status Passed - Info Days in Review: Non-Residential Addition-Alteration Permit Total 0 1 Review Activities Summary Application Type Application Number Approved Total Non-Residential Ag Certificate Total 0 1 Total 4 5 Residential Addition-Alteration Permit Preliminary-Final Plat Total 1 11 Residential New Construction Permit Total 0 3 Total 5 22 Site Plan Total 0 1