Citation
Newcomer Farm, Heritage Center

Material Information

Title:
Newcomer Farm, Heritage Center a visitor center for agricultural interpretation
Creator:
Andrews, Deborah
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
v, 42, [13] leaves : illustrations, charts, forms, maps, color photograph, plans ; 22 x 28 cm

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Historic farms -- Maryland -- Washington County ( lcsh )
Agricultural museums -- Designs and plans -- Maryland -- Washington County ( lcsh )
Agricultural museums ( fast )
Historic farms ( fast )
Maryland -- Washington County ( fast )
Genre:
Architectural drawings. ( fast )
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )
Architectural drawings ( fast )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 45-47).
General Note:
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Master of Architecture, College of Design and Planning.
Statement of Responsibility:
[Deborah Andrews].

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
12101960 ( OCLC )
ocm12101960
Classification:
LD1190.A72 1984 .A878 ( lcc )

Full Text
ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN AURARIA LIBRARY
NEWCOMER FARM/ HERITAGE CENTER


NEWCOMER FARM/HERITAGE CENTER A Visitor Center for Agricultural Interpretation
An architectural thesis presented to the College of Design and Planning, University of Colorado at Denver in partial fulfillment of the reguirements for the Degree of Master of Architecture


The thesis of Deborah Andrews is approved.
Gary Lpng/Committee Chair


PROLOGUE
The purpose of this thesis document is to frame a design problem which will be treated as a design thesis. It is the exploration of an idea as well as an exercise in the definition of practical constraints.
The architecture thesis is considered to be "the unique educational opportunity to show ... abilities in the totality of architectural design." Its objectives include:
"1. To undertake the programming, schematic design and design development of a complex building.
"2. To investigate the theoretical issues of a particular design problem.
"3. To determine the practical constraints within which buildings must be designed .
"4. To encourage the delineation and
enhancement of each individual design process." (1984 Spring Thesis Prep Syllabus/Woolard)
The following compilation strives to set the stage for the above objectives, and to treat an area of interest and concern to me as an individual and a professional.
I hope to do justice to both intentions.
Deborah Andrews


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to acknowledge the following people for their valuable contributions to this thesis: Cabell
Childress for his time and clarity of vision as my principal advisor; Paul Heath for his remembrance of and respect for the ideas of my thesis statement; Lauri Rae Johnson for her attention to the landscape; David Andrews for his patient help obtaining endless site information; Gary Long for his dedication as faculty advisor; and my friends at UCD and my family for their support and understanding.


Table of Contents
Prologue
Acknowlegements
INTRODUCTION
Project Introduction Thesis Statement
SITE
Context/Past and Present Physical Site Features Climate and Comfort
BUILDING
Program Zoning/Code *A Solution
Schedule
Design
Summary
APPENDIX
a. Resources
b. Bibliography
c. Background Data
v


INTRODUCTION
Project Introduction
Thesis Statement


PROJECT INTRODUCTION
"'This is really and truly a country of farmers.'" William Cobbett, 1817
Conrat (1977) p. 10
The problem framed here as a design thesis is not the most likely: "a building among buildings". It is both "buildings upon the landscape", and "buildings with a special relationship of function to the landscape". It is symbolic of that unique area of interface where humanity is involved in direct cooperation and interaction with the land. Neither is the natural setting allowed dominance over human activities here, nor are the human activities (and the behavioral settings and structures that support them) carried on in forgetfulness of a "hidden" ecological system.
In the traditional farm, perhaps more than anywhere else, there is a daily, direct, and symbolic acting out of the human relationship to, interraction with and dependence on the earth system.
The design project which facilitates, or demands, the exploration of this idea is as follows:
An agricultural interpretive center to be built on the Newcomer homestead farm, located southeast of Hagerstown, Maryland, near the Baltimore/Washington metropolitan area.
It is a system of buildings: Agricultural, residential and public which will accomodate and integrate these functions.
A small historic farm (containing a total land area of 132 acres) will be converted to a public agricultural center. School children staying overnight and day-visitors will learn about regional farm history and about contemporary farm methods by observation and participation.
The farm will operate on a small scale, raising rare (historic) farm animal breeds and growing traditional field crops and greenhouse produce. These functions extend beyond the scope of this design thesis. A key aspect of the problem is the integration of these functions: The working farm and the public center.
The project requires the reconstruction and re-use of two existing structures (the stone walls of an historic farmhouse and barn), integration of additional staff housing, an overnight-visitor hostelry for school children, an audi-
1


torium and a day-visitor center, and the siting of exterior interpretive areas and outbuildings. Although respect and consideration will be given to the historic integrity of the site, this is not a historic restoration project, as a farm museum would be.
The total area of building is 25,000 square feet, of which 9,000 square feet will be rehabilitated existing space and 16,000 square feet will be new building.
In addition to the two historic structures and the peripheral outbuildings, three major new buildings are planned: the visitor center, the hostel and a new barn.
This approach to the interpretive center as a building design project suggests that old and new, building and landscape, and urban and rural can integrate learning about and participation in agricultural issues.
The old/new results from an attempt to utilize a historic farm site to say something of contemporary and future relevance about agricultural practices in this country. As this relates to the design thesis, it is explored in the thesis statement.
Building/landscape has to do with the interface of a behavior setting (the traditionally accepted realm of the architect) and an ecological system. This is also discussed briefly in the thesis statement.
Urban/rural applies symbolically to the location of the project on a metropolitan fringe, yet in a setting of strong agricultural pride and tradition. It attempts to offer an awareness of that tradition to those who otherwise would not easily see beyond asphalt gardens and celophane-wrapped tomatoes. It also holds its position in the continuing erosion of that traditional agricultural countryside. This idea is not discussed further in the thesis statement.
2


THESIS STATEMENT
"American agriculture has had many faces. Its history, in reality, is not one story, but many." Conrat (1977) p. 6
As a part of this thesis, it is proposed to explore ways in which a new use can respond to and convey elements of tradition. In this case, the tradition is that of farming. The new use is public access to and education in that tradition. Two hypotheses are suggested for exploration in greater depth:
1. The farm kitchen is the pivotal space of the traditional (preindustrial) farm: Primary living space and crossroads.
(Fitch, 1973? Alexander, et al,
1977; Stilgoe, 1982).
2. The traditional farm suggests an incomplete model for a contemporary human-tended 'ecological' system, with its traditions of building interrelationship, energy use and self-sufficiency. (Stilgoe, 1982).
The two statements are interconnected the farm kitchen was the means to a great deal of family self-sufficiency. Looking at these two traditional characteristics prescribes a focus and an interrelationship of buildings, spaces and functions to be given consideration in the design thesis. The result may not differ greatly from what is ordinarily
done when we locate and design buildings. But use of it can reinforce a sense of connection to tradition in creating a "harmonic" between past and present. The design project could thus become a reflection and abstraction of these two concepts beyond the functional necessities of the program requirements.
Numerous references are made to the historical importance of the farm kitchen in placement and function. The pre-industrial farm kitchen was the "food factory" .
"The processing center of a network of facilities: icehouse, spring-house, wellhouse, milkhouse, smokehouse, washhouse, root cellar, and woodpile. Further out lay the orbit of vegetable garden, orchard, cowbarn, pigpen, chicken run, corncrib, haystack and barns. Beyond this lay the farm itself."
Fitch (1974) p. 109
Although this function began changing with the industrial revolution, it did not have full impact until the first half of this century. The depression-era President's Conference on Home Building and Home Ownership (1932) stated in its report on farm and rural buildings that "the farm home can be viewed as a factory, and
3


should be built with the same care." (proceedings, Volume 7, p. 36)
In discussing early American farmsteads, John Stilgoe comments:
"Farmers built farmhouses according to custom too, but the custom derived from the tradition of housewifery . . Until the
1880's the American farmhouse existed as a machine for working in." Stilgoe (1982) p. 159
He elaborates on the kitchen itself:
"No family wasted kitchen space. Every processing activity except threshing somehow involved the kitchen and the housewife. The husbandman's wife dried herbs, grains, and vegetables, smoked meats, and processed dairy products; in her spare time she processed wool, cotton, and flax, made soap from ashes, and slaughtered poultry. Cramped space made such difficult work nearly impossible, and as larger holdings produced greater harvests, families expanded their kitchens.
"By 1860 the kitchen wing, or "ell", was frequently larger than the house from which it extended. In it the farmwife spent most of her time and around its fringe worked her
husband and children. Ell design preoccupied farm families, agricultural reformers, and even a few architects.
Each month the nation's agricultural periodicals presented farmhouse plans that emphasized the kitchen ell above parlors and bedrooms."
Stilgoe (1982) pp. 160-1
Thus, the kitchen was the center of a constellation of activities and buildings .
"Until well into the second half of the nineteenth century Americans worked diversified farms that produced a variety of crops and livestock for domestic consumption and for cash sale.
Kitchen ells were consequently very large because farmwives managed a variety of complicated operations, most of which demanded specialized spaces. The few architects who involved themselves in farmhouse design rarely understood the complexity of the farmwife's task, and they designed houses totally unsuited for work."
Stilgoe (1982) p. 162
It is noteworthy, then, that the "Farmhouse Kitchen" is listed as a sig nificant pattern for design consideration in A Pattern Language (Alexander et al; 1977), although the discussion


of it there is more general than the points covered above.
"In traditional societies, where there were no servants and the members of a family took care of their own food, the isolated kitchen was virtually unknown.
Even when cooking was entirely in the hands of women, as it very often was, the work of cooking was still thought of as a primal, communal function; and the "hearth", the place where food was made and eaten, was the heart of family life."
Alexander, et al (1977) p. 661
The significant qualities of farmhouse kitchen are assumed:
"In the farmhouse kitchen, kitchen work and family activity were completely integrated in one big room. The family activity centered around a big table in the middle; here they ate, talked, played cards, and did work of all kinds including some of the food preparation. The kitchen work was done communally both on the table, and on counters around the walls. And there might have been a comfortable old chair in the corner where someone could sleep through the activities."
Alexander, et al (1977) p. 662
Evidence for the second hypothesis the farm as an ecologically sensitive and integrated system -- is more ambiguous and even contrary to what is suggested. Practices born out of folk lore, ignorance and a blatant lack of concern for the fate of the land were common to farms of the 'New World' (Stilgoe, 1982), noticeably to the contemporary European view:
"By European standards, American agriculture at the beginning of the nineteenth century was crude and backward. The great bulk of American farmers showed little knowledge or interest concerning beneficial crop rotations; their fields were poorly cultivated and their livestock often ill cared for. Worst of all, the majority of farmers made little or no attempt to adequately manure their cropland."
Conrat (1977) p. 12
Yet there was a traditional pattern of relationship to the land made obvious
"the changing nature of agriculture in the United States as it developed from a simple, self-sufficing way of life, absorbing the energies of over 90 percent of the nation's citizens, into a highly technical and mechanized industry, requiring large inputs of capital /and energy (Fluck, 1980j_/ and employing


less than 5 percent of the population. This great transformation involved not only a revolution in agricultural technology and methods a transition from ox-power to four-wheel-drive tractors, from diversified farming to large-scale specialized production it also involved a change in popular attitudes toward the occupation of farming." Conrat (1977) p. 6
Stilgoe (1982) discusses this transformation by tracing the use and connotation of the term 'husbandry' through to the mid-1800's. The husbandman had a unique, interactive relationship with the earth that he worked. "It was the husbandman, . .
who became by the middle of the eighteenth century a cultivator or an agriculturalist, and by 1820, a farmer." (Stilgoe, 1982, p. 137) The farmer became the 'master' and ultimately the 'exploiter' of the land. Looking at this continuum, and carrying it through to modern farm economics and agribusiness (the farmer as 'businessman-for-profit'), something can be learned and deomonstrated from the earlier, traditional pattern of striving for harmony with the land.
The husbandmand and family was to his individual farmstead as our larger culture is to a larger ecological system:
The question of where and how to fit in harmoniously with the overall ecology
of the land is similar.
What, then, do these elements of the past have to do with the proposed design thesis site and a new use? Agricultural interpretation does not assume a strict historic reconstruction of the site but, also, the center intends to explore a didactic role about contemporary farm methods and to draw relationships, or threads, from past to present and possibly future.
It is suggested here that the kitchen function is such a thread which may be expressed in a physical design solution, whether or not it is specifically requested in the program. Likewise, the tradition of farmstead layout and interrelationships is suggested as a major thread whether it apply to recycling activities, building arrangements, or "the relationship /of the farmstead as a whole/ to the landscape." Fairbrother (1970) p. 235.
The problem is one of the transposition of these two historic patterns into an architectural form which corresponds to the new function above and beyond the basic requirements of the program. What becomes the new focal point, just as the old kitchen was the prototype? If the intention is to bring new visitors into an experience of the traditional relationships, then a new eating/living/ working place can become the focal point of the visitor center and hostel.
6


This might be done as a matter of course, but to do it consciously as an underlying means of conveying some sense of tradition would strengthen the impact of the experience and of 'learning' about tradition. The site is then not a 'museum' in which visitors passively and vicariously observe the past. It is a living experience in which the visitor becomes directly involved.
The same theme is used in the organization of the system, although the impact is less strong because a single focal point is lacking. In this case, the transposition is the central theme, and can be alluded to in the presentation of the entire building complex to the prototypical visitor with an explanation of how elements fit the whole
7


H
t

SITE
Context Past and Present
Physical Site Features
Climate and Comfort


SITE LOCATION
Pennsylvania
miles
VICINITY Maryland
SITE LOCATION AND ACCESS
The site is located in eastern Washington County, in the broad Hagerstown Valley, which is part of the Great Limestone Valley System of the eastern United States. This valley is located between the Blue Ridge and Appalachian Mountain Ranges. Its floor is rolling, with some local hills and ridges.
The site itself is roughly bowl-shaped and fronts State Highway 40 on the northeast edge. Access to the site is directly off of Highway 40 via an existing dirt lane.
Interstate 70, a major east-west route from Baltimore/Washington DC, parallels Highway 40 less than a mile to the north.
Immediately to the east of the site, Highway 40 intersects Route 66, a local north-south route which also interchanges with Interstate 70.
LOCATION
8
\


SITE CONTEXT
PAST
Washington County was established in 1776. Settlers to the area arrived mostly from other parts of the colonies and were of English, Scotch and Swiss descent. Other nationalities followed. Farms were established in the county by 1735, and by 1800, the area was well settled. Commercial centers were located at Hagerstown, 6 miles northeast of the site, and at Williamsport.
The site itself was homesteaded by the son of a Swiss immigrant who originally settled near Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Christian Newcomer, the son, moved to the area in 1775, to farm, work at carpentry, and ultimately, to preach as a circuit rider with a group of German Reformed evangelists. Two stone grist mills are located northwest of the site on Beaver Creek, and are associated with the Newcomer family (these may have been operated by brother of Newcomer).
The stone buildings on the site are highly characteristic of typical rural buildings of the vicinity. A historic district is designated to the immediate northwest of the site, an area which includes the mills mentioned above.
SITE CONTEXT
PRESENT
The site is situated in a hilly area of rolling fields and woodlands immediately west of the Catoctin Mountains in the Blue Ridge Mountain Range. Woodlands once covered the majority of the county. Now, 20 percent of the total land, or
110.000 acres, is wood with the 80 species of trees (mostly deciduous) which grow in the county.
Of the total land area of the county,
150.000 acres was still devoted to
active farming in 1982. 138,773 acres,
or 47 percent of the county was in designated agricultural districts, and 92,838 acres, or 31 percent of the county was in designated conservation districts. The area, sheltered by two mountain ranges, prides itself in its long history and in its richness of natural resources and scenery.
The county is entirely within the Potomac River Drainage Basin, of which it comprises 3 percent of the total, and which flows in the Chesapeake Bay east of Washington, DC. Water is plentiful in the area, although development makes water quality a major concern.
It is estimated that the population of the county will be 118,500 (51,000) by 1985. The population of the county is largely homogeneous, and 81 percent of the residents have a high school education or less. The median income in 1979 was $19,346. Manufacturing, retail trade and services are major employment sources. Agriculture comprised less than 3 percent of the total employment in 1980.
9


EXISTING SITE BUILDINGS
A number of buildings currently exist on the site, all of them clustered in the northeast sector of the site off of Route 40. These include the two stone historic structures, both made uninhabitable by fires (the barn burned circa 1965, the house in April, 1982); five various wood frame outbuildings; a concrete block (emu) two-car garage located near the old farmhouse structure; and a small single-story emu residence to the west of the older buildings.
The two structures of concern here are the stone house and stone barn. Both were built prior to 1795 by the Swiss immigrants who homesteaded the land. The buildings are characteristic in style and materials for that region and that period. The walls are built of limestone rubble quarried locally. In spite of the loss of major interior wood supports and roofs due to the fires, major deterioration of these limestone walls has not yet occurred in either building.
The house was a two and one-half story, five-bay dwelling with wood (painted) trim A one and one-half story, two-bay ell extends from the rear of the main house, and a more recent emu lean-to addition is attached to this ell on the north.
The barn was the traditional stone-end bank barn ofthe period, located on an east-west exis with the banking on the north side. The south side opens out onto what was once the barnyard, with a milk-house attached to the southwest side of
the barn
The house is located to the southeast of the barn and is situated on a north-south axis facing away from the barn.
It is cut into the slope which leads directly down to the stream feeding Beaver Creek, and the south side of the basement of the house encloses a spring, which once served as the water supply for the house.
(See following site photos and drawing.)
10


ca. 1974
11



was**
West elevation
13


looking NW
Barn
14


SITE VEGETATION
Vegetation on the site is a result of combined human and natural influences. Although the land has not been farmed traditionally since the barn burned circa 1965, most of the fields have been planted and used as pastureland by neighboring farmers. Presently, the low eastern field in front of the house is fenced as a small cow pasture muddy and in poorly eroded condition. Surrounding fields have been sown with various grasses.
Large trees surrounding the house include elm and sycamore. Fence rows dividing the fields are composed of trees and brush, including locust, hickory, yellow poplar, maple, oak, walnut, beech and birch. The far western, sloped portion of the site is wooded and includes these same tree types. A denser wood encroaches onto the site along the southeast boundary and a small grove of trees is adjacent to Route 40 east of the site entry lane. The stream beds which run through the site also support various deciduous trees, bushes and grasses. The remainder of the site is cultivated open field or meadow.
TOPOGRAPHY, SOILS AND HYDROLOGY
The site consists of undulating contours which range in elevation from 480 to 620 feet above sea level. Beaver Creek cuts through the middle of the acreage from north to south, and a tributary stream
flows west into Beaver Creek from the east side of the site. The existing farm buildings are located directly to the north of this stream. The general configuration of the topography begins high on the west, southeast and northeast edges ofthe site and slopes downward to the streambeds (see slope and site analysis maps).
The soils of the area are various silt-loams of good agricultural quality, resting on a shelf of limestone. The location of a septic system on this shelf could adversely impact the streams and ground water.
The 100-year flood plain for Beaver Creek is broad, as indicated on the flood plain overlay, although the rest of the site is well-drained. The seasonal high water table of the stream beds is from 1 to 4 feet. A spring providing ample flow is located in the basement of the farmhouse, and there is an existing drilled well on the site to the west of the barn.
SITE UTILITIES
Power accesses the site from Route 40 along the dirt lane. Public water and sanitary sewers are not provided in this portion of the county, nor does the county have plans in the near future to provide either. Approval of sewage treatment is critical to site development.
15


0 300 600 1200
NORTH
barn
chouse
Site Analysis


SOIL TYPES
17


lOO-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
17a


% SLOPE
17b


SUITABILITY FOR SEPTIC
17c


CLIMATE
GENERAL
Average Temp: 53.4F annual
Temperature Extremes: -8 to 107F
Precipitation: 37 inches annual
Humidity: Peaks in July-September
Degree Days: 5224 annual heating 1024 annual cooling
Floods: Occur in late winter/spring
due to snow melt (infrequent)
Latitude: 39 34' 30"
Longitude: 77 38' 30"
Elevation: 500 feet (average)
(site range 480-620 feet)
The site is located in a temperate climatic zone of the middle latitudes, in a general climatic subdivision of Maryland referred to as the Appalachian Mountain Area. The area is marked by well-defined seasons, including a winter dormant season for plant growth. Changeable weather patterns are characteristic for the spring and the fall. Summers are warm to hot, but the area is less humid than the coastal areas of Maryland and tempered by mountain ranges to the east and west.
Because the general flow of the atmosphere is from west to east, the large land mass to the north and west of the region predisposes it to a continental-
type climate. The Appalachian Mountains give the area some protection from icy blasts of cold arctic air. Still, in winter a high percentage of cold northwesterly winds are brought to the area, prevailing winds are from the northwesterly quadrant from October to June.
In the summer, winds shift to the westerly quadrant. Generally, under atmospheric conditions causing air drift from the continent to the ocean, fair weather occurs. When the direction of air drift is reversed, there is increasing cloudiness and a tendency for rain.
In the entire valley region, the undulating surfaces and slope make cold air drainage a major consideration for crop growth. The cold air layer on the ground can become very dense and flow into valleys and lower elevations from ridges and higher elevations. It is not unusual in the spring and fall to have lower areas well-frosted and higher elevations unaffected .
Consequently, the microclimate of the site is largely influenced by its own rolling topography, alternately wooded and open areas, and Beaver Creek and its branch stream cutting through the middle of the site. These various climates can be grouped according to the different site zones (see Site Analysis). The most critical area for cold air drainage on the site is the stream bed and immediately adjacent land.
18


COMFORT
Because the climatic conditions of the site are predominantly cool (including three months Dec, Jan, Feb in the cold range and three Jun, Jul, Aug -in the comfort range), heating outweighs cooling as a consideration for comfort. This is confirmed by a comparison of the heating and cooling degree days (5224 vs 1024). However, a large number of hot (90+F) days combined with a high summer humidity implies that cooling must still be considered in design guidelines.
The potential for utilization of solar energy is moderately good (a high number of annual cloud and partly cloudy days modifies solar gain considerably). The following priorities are suggested for use with this climate (AIA Research Corp, 1978) :
1. a. Minimize heat loss by reducing
exterior surfaces
b. Minimize heat loss through material selection
c. Minimize heat lost through openings
2. Protect from wind when it is too cold for comfort
3. Use solar gain when it is too cold for comfort
4. Keep hot temperatures out in summer with the same methods used to keep cold temperatures out
5. Protect from sun when it is too hot for comfort
6. Open up to cooling breezes when it is too hot for comfort (use porches and high vents)
An optimum building with a width to length ratio of 1:1.6, and the long axis running east-west, is suggested for this climate (McGuinness, et al; 1955). Generally, houses which are compact, well-insulated, caulked and weatherstripped will afford the greatest comfort in this climate.
Additional suggestions:
-Triple-glazed windows, shuttered; minimal on east and west; avoid on north elevations
-Select materials for thermal efficiency and construction tightness
-Plant windbreaks to stop winter winds
-Select site for solar orientation
-Use strategies for solar heat gain and storage
-Provide overhangs to block high summer sun and shutters to reduce heat gain
-Provide openings, porches and outdoor living spaces for natural ventilation
-Use plants to block summer sun and provide a cooler site
19


TEMPERATURE RANGE
record high a max avg high monthly mean-4
min avg low----
record low 4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
F
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR

i k
A i c 1 1 A
A k 1 i 4- i k
k i k

1 r -0-
r r
i r 1 f
r 1 r

i t
1 V r 1 r 1 r

RELATIVE HUMIDITY
20


DEGREE DAYS
HOT and COLD DAYS
O one day a less than 1/2


PRECIPITATION
no rm al water equivalent
PRECIPITATION DAYS
rain
snow
fog
days
22


CLEAR and CLOUDY DAYS
partly
cloudy
(.7-1.0)
cloudy (.3-.7)
clear
(.0.3)
SOLAR RADIATION
23


WIND SPEED and DIRECTION
24


BUILDING
Program
Zoning/Code
*A Solution
Schedule
Design
Summary


BUILDING PROGRAM
The programming was organized in terms of the four parameters of function, form, economy and time. The key requirements are:
1. The organization and relationship (and separation) of the major functions;
2. The incorporation of the physical characteristics of the site into that unity of functions, including the existing buildings on the site;
3. The phasing of the development to accommodate archeological study of the site, management and future growth;
4. Planning for the strongly cyclical (seasonal) character of the use of the site facilities;
5. The matching of the initial budget with the strong character needs of the site and with important operating and maintenance requirements.
25


BUILDING PROGRAM
FUNCTION
The functional requirement of the program is seen in general terms as the interaction and separation of the three major functional components: Agricultural; Staff/Residential; and Visitor/lnterpretive (see Figure 1). The grey areas in this grouping provide the potential to interface between functions (for example, parts of the barn functional area need to be accessible to visitors for demonstrations). Also, some space have the potential to be combined, but have been kept separate in order to preserve alternatives.
Functional Goals:
1. accommodate three user groups
Staff (administration/farm management/
agricultural research)
Day visitors Overnight visitors
2. Meet three functions
Farming
Staff Housing Visitor Interpretation
3. Provide
*Small scale operating farm which includes research and functions as a community extension service *Small research facility *Integral housing for staff *Housing for University interns for stays of 1-6 months ^Visitor center for exhibits and activities
*Eating facility/auditorium *Hostel for school children (3 day stays/30 students/4 adults)
*Develop site to reflect both farming and instructional aspects
4. Coordinate the functional goals with phasing.
26


FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
privacy
FIGURE 1
27


SPACE REQUIREMENT SUMMARY
AGRICULTURAL area (sf) STAFF RESIDENCE area FUNCTIONAL: YEAR-ROU ND/FULLTIME: DAY VISITORS:
Barn hay sto.800 Living Units: (3) Office/Sales 300
Cow stalls 200 Living Rm 200 Exhibit (1400+600) 2000
Thresh, fir. 600 Kitchen 150 Restrooms (2) 350
Cow stalls 200 1800 Dining 120 Lunchroom (20 cap) 300
Barnyard 2400 Den 100 Kitchen 200
Poultry House 300 2 Bdrms 300 Classroom 150
Dairy House 300 Bath (14) 80 Auditorium 1500
Equip/Tool Shed 900 Porch 40 Demonstration(in/ou' :) 300
Corn Crib 200 1130 3390 Net Interior : 5000
Silo (d=10 ft) 80 Commons In/Ext 100/150 ER=67:33
Root Cellar 80 Laundry 40 Gross Interior : 7463
Net Interior: 3660 Net Interior: 3110 OVERNIGHT HOSTEL:
Net Exterior: 2400 Net Exterior: 150 Girls Bunks (16-20) i-50-500
ER=60:40 ER=67:33 Boys Bunks (16-20) I-50-500
Gross Interior: 6100 Gross Interior: 4642 Shower/Toilets (2) I 50-200
RESEARCH: INTERNS: Adults (4) 500-400
Lab 200 Bedrooms (3@100) 300 Adult Toilet (2) 50
Office 120 Priv. Study (3 ) 90 Common Room 200
Library 100 Bath (1-g) 60 Storage 1504175
Hothouses (3250) 750 Kitchen/C ommons 80/100 Dining 525
Net Interior: 1170 Net Interior: 630 Kitchen 200
ER=55:45 ER=70:30 Entry 75
Gross Interior: 2127 Gross Interior: 900 Net Interior :2525-
2825
ER=70:30 3769-
Gross Interior : 4216
parking:
80 feet wide yard 3-car garage 600 50-car plus overflow
circle: tractor 5-car spaces 2000 area for?special
truck events (600 cars) 20000-
Gross Interior: 8227 Gross Interior: 6142 Gross Interior :11232-
% of total: 32-33 % of total: 23-24 11680
Gross Exterior: 2400 Gross Exterior: 2150 % of total: 43-44
% of total: 10 % of total: 9 Gross Exterior : 20100
% of total: 81
28


ro
CD
F unctional
Barn
May storage
Com Stalls
Threshing Fir Hilkino Stall
Barnyard
Poultry House
Dairy House
Equip/Tool Shed
Corn Crib Eilo (tower
.Boot Cellar Research
I
Lab
Office Library Hothouses (3)~
Fulltime 5taff(3)
Livino Room
Dining Boom
Kitchen
Den
Porch
M. Bedroom
L. Bath
Bedroom
Bath
Interns
Bedrooms (3)
Study (3 )~
Both
Kitchen/Commonc
)ay Visitor Office/Sale;
Exhibit/Display Restrooms
L unchroom
Classroom
Auditorium
Demonstrati nn
Oyernioht Hostel
Firl n___Biinkc
Bovs Bunk;
Shower/Toilets
Fern. Adult
Toilet
Male Adult
Toilet
Common Room
Storage
Dininq
Kitchen____________
jjtSY/.L'iUti MODE)
r L- l n n
Parking
X o
c CD CD "O
a n CD i-t
CL n n H-
CD CD o 3
CD CD a CD
1 CD a -J
i H- CD v<
CD CT t-j
cr 1 ><
i> CD
CD \
a
o
rt-
SPACE RELATIONSHIP MATRIX


BUILDING PROGRAM FUNCTIONAL STANDARDS
I. Agricultural Buildings
A. Utilize Planning Zones:
Zone 1 House (Here 'house1
can mean visitor and staff facilities) Zone 2 Machinery Storage Zone 3 Small Animal Units and Grain and Feed Storage Supplies
Zone 4 Large Animal Units
B. Considerations for Large Animal
Units: Space for expansion;
Adequate space; drainage; waste management; access; loading facilities; feed distrihution and services
C. All buildings accessible by truck Large dcors, head room and no interior posts to facillitate tractor cleaning and loading and unloading.
D. "A good farmstead plan takes advantage of natural influences." (Timesaver Standards):
Major openings east and west; Shielding from winds and odors; Well-drained locations
"An arrangement that follows the contour of the land will make maintenance easier and will improve appearance."
D. A Farm Service Yard:
-Makes it easy to get from one activity center to another -Reduces the number of gates -Room to maneuver machinery -Makes farmstead look more unified -80 ft min. width for vehicle turnaround
C. Grain Center:
-Orientation for sun and air to facillitate natural drying
D. Dairy structures:
-Locate on side of service yard closest to lanes and pastures
E. Windbreaks:
-Ideal distance between windbreak and areas requiring the most protection (house, livestock shelter and feeding areas) is 150 feet (300 ft max.)
(Zone of noticeable protection=
10 times tree height)
F. Corncribs:
Long axis north-south 4 foot maximum width
30


FUNCTIONAL STANDARDS
BUILDING PROGRAM -II. Research Facility
A. Simple rectangular configurations allow the greatest efficiency of layout and circulation
B. Greenhouses:
-Provide for visitor access -Minimal structural system but strong
-Temperature and Humidity control systems to allow 3 different environmental zones 5C-55^min 60min 65+ min
-Circulation is very important
C. Utility services to access lab and greenhouses
D. Library:
-Proximity to administration if possible
-Office/work area.'for receiving and processing books -Storage for photos, slides, films and videos
III
Staff Residential
A. Full-tirre/Year-round:
-Provide moderate physical
and visual privacy/isolation from farm and visitor areas
B. Interns
-Direct access to exhibit, visitor and research facilities -Accommodations can be austere
31


BUILDING FROGRAf
FUNCTIONAL STANBARDS
IV. Visitors Center
A. Entrance and Orientation Space: -Include sales and visitor
information
-Provide adequate storage for sales
B. Interpretive Exhibits:
-Flexibility of spaces -Coherence of circulation -Control'of''visitor access
C. Administrative Staff Services: -Allow space for growth -Individual work areas plus
room for files and general work spaces -A place for interns
D. Support Functions:
-Telephone equipment -Photocopier and supplies -Lounge or lunchroom
S. Shipping and Receiving for Exhibit Material
F. Storage:
-Exhibit material, furniture and equipment
-Room fcr expansion -Special Events materials (chairs, tables, etc)
G. Auditorium:
-Audio-visual equipment room
H. Public Access:
Separated from staff areas ana
Hj O Hj (X
isplay receiving and processing rom delivery and distribution of onstruction supplies and from ood services and trash removal
Overnight Hostel
VC Ur Sink Showr 16/20 boys: 2 1 2-3 2
16/20 girls: 3-2-3 3
C. Kitchen Flow Pattern:
Burners 7 Refrigerator (9 cuft) 3 Ovens 2
32
K\ 00 N"\ CM


BUILDING PROGRAM
FORM
Formal Goals:
1. Develop the site sensitively towards
* History and Archeology of Site
* Restoration of Soil Quality
* Integration of the Building and Site Functions
2. Restoration research occurs on site: The site is a laboratory for demonstration and learning of staff and visitors.
3. Quality, durability, operation and maintenance are balanced with budget
4. Physical isolation of staff housing from the main work area.
5. Special attention given to the critical issues of soils and drainag 6
6. The public image/entry express the unique and compatible identity of the function.
33


BUILDING PROGRAM
TIME AND ECONOMY
TIME
The development of the center will occur in four phases:
1. Assessment and Inventory of existing conditions, to include an archeological study of the site. The archeology itself would be phased to begin with areas of the site critical to immediate use (i.e., the two existing structures and vicinities).
2. Reconstruction and Restoration:
a. Farmhouse
b. Student Hostel built
3. Stabilization and Growth
a. Barn
b. Permanent Staff Housing
c. Farm Buildings
3. Maturity and Evolution
a. Visitor Center
b. Greenhouse/Research Facility
Temporal Goals:
1. Development over time is matched with budget as well as developing market. 5-year increments allow evaluation of Market response; budget/economy; and project goals. 2
2. Archeological survey and research, reconstruction, building and occupancy will be phased; will involve early staff involvement and direction will involve visitor participation
and observation when possible and practical.
4. Yearly operation will reflect the seasonal cycling of farm function and bring the public into that cycle.
ECONOMY
Economic Goals:
1. Optimize time-use.
2. Moderate economy with a range from the most functional buildings (barn, etc) to visitor and living facilities. Focus on quality and craftmanship of relationships and detail, rather than costly materials.
3. Consider short-term as well as longterm merchandising; support phasing.
34


ZONING AND BUILDING CODS
PROJECT: Newcomer Farm/Heritage Center
LOCATION: Wagner's Crossroads, 'Washington County, Maryland
APPLICABLE ZONING ORDINANCE: Washington County Zoning Ordinance
APPLICABLE BUILDING CODE: BOCA Basic Building Code and
The 1 and 2 Family Dwelling Code
ZONING CLASSIFICATION: "A" Agricultural District
(All planned uses are principal permitted uses-by-right in District "A". Application can also be made to the Board of Appeals to overlay a Historic Preservation "HP" District on the site. This would require submission and approval of a site plan. )
FLOOR AREA RATIO/BUILDING SQ FT LIMITS: n/a
BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS: 2i stories or 35 feet (some exceptions Sect. 23.4 ordinance)
LOT AREA. LOT WIDTH AND YARD REQUIREMENTS (minimum):
Type Use Lot area Lot width Lot area per family Front yard depth Side yard width Rear yd depth
Dwelling, single family 40,000 sf 100 ft 40,000 sf 40 ft 15 ft 50 ft
Dwelling, two-family 40,000 100 '20,000 40 15 50
Dwelling, semidetached 20,000 50 20,000 40 15 (ext. side only) 50
Conversion apts. 1 acre 150 10,000 40 30 50
Other permitted or cond. uses 3 acres 300 - 50 50 50
35


OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS: Adequate DRIVEWAY AND CURB CUT REQUIREMENTS: n/a
parking for all uses
FIRE ZONE DESIGNATION: n/a
OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: varies (see following breakdown)
DOOR WIDTH REQUIREMENTS: Not less than 3 ft STAIR WIDTH REQUIREMENTS: Not less than 44 inches STAIRWAY LANDING REQUIREMENTS: Equal to stair width CORRIDOR WIDTH REQUIREMENTS: Not less than 44 inches DEAD END CORRIDOR LIMITS: None allowed DOOR SWING REQUIREMENTS: Direction of exit STAIR RAIL REQUIREMENTS (balcony): 42 inch ht.
RISER/TREAD LIMITS: Greater or equal to 4", less or equal to 7t inches (public buildings)
8 riser, 9" tread limit for residential
RAMP REQUIREMENTS: See handicapped requirements.
EXIT LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS: Required at every exit doorway
EMERGENCY LIGHTING: Required
CEILING HEIGHT MINIMUMS: n/a (Exits 7 ft clear min)
LIGHT AND VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS: varies ROOF ACCESS: Not required below 4 stories SKYLIGHT REQUIREMENTS: Non-combustible on curb
36


TOILET ROOK FIXTURE REQUIREMENTS:
See US Plumbing Code and Handicapped requirements
OCCUPANCY USE GROUP BREAKDOWN:
Animal/ Hay/Feed Research/ 1 family Hostel Food Visitor
Use Group: Food Storage Storage Hothouses DU's & Interns Svc. Center
S-1/S-2 H B R-5 (1&2 fam. R-1 M A-3
Fire Grading: 3/2 hrs code)
Table 1402 4 hrs 2 hrs 1 hr 2 hrs 3 hrs 2 hrs
Kin. Uniform 125-
Live load (table 906) 125-250 psf 250 psf 50 psf (see table 906) 75 psf 100 psf
Snow Loads 15 psf 25 psf 18 psf 18 psf 25 psf 18 psf 25 psf
(911,1a,b,c)
Height and Area Limits
See breakdown by construction types:
tables 505,
507, 508 (appendix).
37


A SOLUTION




















goals
. a unique place .
. an educational setting .
. a sequential experience .
. views . space . function .
. . enhancing experience of the 200-year
buildings .
. . referring new to old . .
. traditional farm kitchen distinctive massing of buildings following the poetry of the site .
. site concept .
Newcomer Farm/Heritage Center
old
entry


I


Si
floor plan
east
west
BMBEB


SUMMARY
"People cannot maintain their spiritual roots and their connections to the past if the physical world they live in does not also sustain these roots."
Alexander, et aL; 1977, p. 132
40


CONCLUSION
It is difficult, perhaps even presumptuous, to evaluate one's own design in terms of how well it corresponds to an original written statement. This design thesis has provided the opportunity to rediscover the dynamic nature of the design process, from the initial conception of a design problem, through its definition, to the final presentation of the design solution. The ideas suggested in the initial thesis statement here were carried through this process neither lost among other considerations, nor dominant among the complex of design relationships. In retrospect, this seems appropriate.
In returning to evaluate the placement of the kitchen/hearth in the hostel, it attempts to express the focal relationship that was suggested in the thesis statement. A true evaluation can only be made by its utilization -- can this new hearth, in practice, fulfill the historic paradigm of the farm kitchen? That question must be studied when there are people there.
A harmonious interrelationship of the buildings was also an underlying intention of the new design. The hypothesis, as stated, suggests that further study of traditional farm layout and function would add greater meaning to these interrelationships
In closing, to evaluate the process and design the following questions are asked Does the design show a "good fit"?; does it remain true to the initial statement of the thesis?; did the process as well as the design lead to an enhancement of the abilities and understanding of the designer? It is suggested here that the answers to these questions are, in overall, affirmative, and thus fulfill the purpose for which the thesis process is intended.


APPENDIX
a. Resources and Acknowledgements
b. Bibliography
c. Background Data


ACKNOWLEGEMENTS
David H. Andrews, Smithsburg, Maryland For an inexhaustible willingness to assist with the gathering of site information.
Tom Christensen, City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department, Austin, Texas. Consulting on programming approaches.
Robert McQuarie, Director Littleton Historical Museum,
Littleton, Colorado Consultations on programming.
RESOURCES
Bohman & Lindsey, Realtors 138 W. Washington St. Hagerstown, MD
Washington County Historical Society 135 W. Washington St.
Hagerstown, MD
Washington County Planning Commission Richard Snipe, Associate Planner 33 W. Washington St.
Hagerstown, MD
Washington County Zoning, Building Permits & Inspection
Paul Prodonovich, Administrator 33 W. Washington St.
Hagerstown, MD
Washington County Department of Tourism Court House Annex, 20 S. Summit Ave. Hagerstown, MD
Washington County Economic Development Court House Annex, 20 S. Summit Ave. Hagerstown, MD
Washington Board:
County Historical Advisory John Erye, Eleanor Lakin, Catherine Thompson


b. BIBLIOGRAPHY
THESIS STATEMENT
Alexander, Christopher, et al (1977) A Pattern Language; Towns, Buildings, Construction; Oxford University Press, New York.
Brunskill, R. W. (1974) Vernacular Architecture of the Lake Counties; Faber and Faber, Ltd London.
Brunskill, R. W. (1970) Illustrated Handbook of Vernacular Architecture; Universe Books, New York.
Conrat, Maisie and Richard (1977) The American Farm: A Photographic History; Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston.
Fairbrother, Nan (1970) New Lives, New Landscapes; Knopf, New York.
Fitch, James Marston (1973) American Building: The Historical Forces That Shaped It; Schocken Books, New York.
Fluck, Richard C., et al (1980) Agricultural Energetics; AVI Publishing Co., Westport, CT.
Halsted, B., ed. (1977/1881) Barns, Sheds and Outbuildings; Stephen Greene Press, Vermont.
Hancocks, David (1971) Animals and Architecture; Hugh Evelyn Ltd, London.
Kauffman, Henry J. (1975) The American Farmhouse; Hawthorn Books, Inc., New York.
Klamkin, Charles (1973) Barns: Their History, Preservation and Restoration; Hawthorn Books, Inc., New York.
McAlester, Virginia and Lee (1984) A Field Guide to American Houses; Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. New York.
Mann, Albert Russell, Chairman (1932) Farm and Village Housing; Report of the Committee on Farm and Village Housing, The President's Conference on Home Building and Home Ownership, Washington, DC.
Stilgoe, John R. (1982) Common Landscape of America, 1580 to 1845; Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.


PHYSICAL SITE FEATURES
Sharp, Curtis (1977) "Conservation Plants for the Northeast"; Soil Conservation Service, USDA, USGFC, Washington, DC.
Soil Conservation Service, USDA (October, 1962) Soil Survey: Washington County, Maryland; USGPO, Washington, DC.
Committee on Conservation of Historic Stone Buildings and Monuments, National Research Council (1980) Conservation of Historic Stone Buildings and Monuments; National Academy Press, Washington DC.
CLIMATE AND COMFORT
AIA Research Corporation (November, 1978) Regional Guidelines for Building Passive Energy Conserving Homes (US Dept, of Housing and Urban Development); USGPO, Washington, DC.
Mazria, Edward (1979) The Passive Solar Energy Book; Rodale Press, Emmaus, PA.
McGuinness, William J., et al (1955) Mechanical and Electrical Equipment for Buildings; John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Olgyay, Victor (1963) Design with Climate: Bioclimatic Approach to Architectural Regionalism; Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
National Climatic Center, NOAA (1980) Climatic Atlas of the United States; USGPO, Washington, DC.


PROGRAM
DeChiara, et al (1978) Timesavers Standards
City of Austin, Parks and Recreation Department, Planning and Design Section (December,1983) "Draft Management Statement for Jourdan-Bacliman Pioneer Farm"; unpublished.
Palmer, M. (1981) The Architect1s Guide to Facility Programming; AIA, Washington, DC.
Pena, William (1977) Problem Seeking: An Architectural Programming Primer; Boston, MA.
Whitaker, James H. (1979) Agricultural Buildings and Structures; Reston Publishing Co., Reston, VA.
ZONING/CODES
The BOCA Basic Building Code (1981).
Washington County, Maryland, Zoning Ordinance.
ADDITIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY
Lynch, Kevin (1971) Site Planning, 2nd Edition; The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.










c. BACKGROUND DATA








' ~ NOMINATION FORM
for the
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES,
District 16
NATIONAL PARKS SERVICE
h N A E
c OMMON:
The Lakin Farm
ND'OR HISTORIC:
The Christian Newcomer House, Resurvey on Stull's Forest
7. LOCATION
| J1REET A N C* NUMBER:
south ofU.S. 40, just west of Wagner's Crossroads
C 1 T Y OR TOWN: Beaver Creek, Route 9
STATE Maryland COUNTY: Washington
3. CLASSIFICATION
CO
Z
o
I
u
=3
oc
h-
un
CATEGORY
(Check One)
Ownership
STATUS
ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC
Diltrict g Building Pl-b|i
L Si ta Q Struilur* Z P,lv<"
Ob,.et Eo,h
Public Acqui fition: f~| in Proce s
( | Bing Considered
( I Occupied B! Unoccupied Preiervotion work in progres s
Y:
I I Rtrictd I I Urv#fricr*d 0 No
PRESENT USE (Check One or More ea Appropriate)
0 Agric ultural
1 | Commercial
t 1 Educational ( I Enterta inment
Gov ernm*nt I Industrial
1 1 Mi li to y [ Museum
Pork
fe3 P rivate Residence ( I Religious ( j Scientific
I 1 Transportation 53 OtKer (Specify)
bping rpmodplpd at- prpspnf
I I Commonfi
4. OWNER OF PROPERTY
OWNER'S NAME: John R. and Marie F. Lakin
UJ STREET AND NUMBER: .
iu Route 2, Box 95
WO CITY OR TOWN: STATE:
Boonsboro Maryland 21713
| 5. LOCATION OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Wl A,>
COURTHOUSE. REGISTRY OF DEEDS. ETC:
Washington Countv Court House
STREET AND NUMBER:
West Washington Street
CITY OR TOWN: STATE
Hagerstown Maryland
Title Reference cf Current Deed (Book -Pg e ) ; 518/A34 ...
6. REPRESENTATION in existing surveys
TITLE OF SURVEY:
DATE OF SURVEY:
n Federal State County Q Locol
DEPOSITORY FOR SURVEY RECORDS.
STREET AND NUMBER:
CITY OR TOWN:
STATE:


j f UtiCKir i mn
CONDITION
V Excellent C Good Q Foir O D#triorod R*ins Unxoosd
i Check One)
y A'lered Q Unolrrd
BE Tut PRESENT > 4 D ORDINAL (If knon-nj P H V $ I C At APPEARAN
(Check One)
I j Moved Orifliool Sito
C E
This house is located south of U.S. AO, just west of Wagner's Crossroads, about six miles east of Hagerstown in Washington County, Maryland. It is situated on a slope, directly over a spring and faces east.
The structure is a two-and-one-half story, five-bay stone dwelling with white trim. A one-and-a-half story, two-bay el addition extends to the rear or west of the main section. A modern lean-to addition has been attached to the north side of the el.
The walls are constructed of coursed local fieldstone at the front and north side elevations with much rougher stones evident in the south and rear walls and in the addition. At the southwest corner of the house, the full cellar is exposed above ground level. The spring was present in that portion of the ground floor. Its course has been changed slightly in recent alterations. Decorative stonework at the exterior of the house includes flat arches of finely cut stone over major openings in the front and north end walls. The arches contain seven stones with a larger keystone at the center. A circular plaque lined with header bricks is located under the gable in the north wall. The plaque is said to have held a date inscription at one time.
Windows appear to be spaced evenly in the facade. In other walls, however, less concern for uniformity of placement is shown. The openings are framed with wide wooden members which are mitered at the corners and are finished with a bead at the inside edge. Nine-over-six light double-hung sashes are present at the first story while six-over-six light sashes are used at the second story level. Small four-light openings illuminate the attic.
The main entrance is located in the center bay of the facade. The entranci way is framed simply and includes a transom. The original front door has been replaced with a modern one. Other entrances are located at the rear of the house and the addition. These doorways are wide and are quite primitive in appearance.
A one-story hipped roof entrance porch is present at the front door.
The roof is covered with modem asphalt shingles. Brick chimneys are present inside each gable end. A two-story chimney rises from inside the end of the el. The roof is finished with a tapered barge board which shows a decorative bead. The eaves boxing shows a band of decorative molding both on its surface and comice molding.
A short distance west of the house are the ruins of a large stone end bank bam.
The interior of the house is divided by a center hall. The fireplace mantels appear to have been influenced by the early federal period and show much use of decorative reeding. All original interior doors have six raised panels trimmed with quirked quarter round molding.
The house is in excellent condition and is at present being remodeled.
It stands on a tract containing 130.0 acres.
m
m
70
(Z
n
o
z
on


vn
O
t-
U
=3
O'
isi
Z
UJ
UJ
l/T
o nbion ] 1 5*h Century | | 16th Century FI 17*h Century 55 18th Century ( 1 19th Century
SPECIFIC DATE SI ill Applicable e n J Known)
AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE (Check One or More me Appropriate)
A bot g ioo 1 r] EdoCOtion ( 1 Political
j 1 I tor iC r 1 Engineering Religion/ Phi.
I ) Historic ( | Industry losophy
[ 1 Agriculture | ] Invention Q7] Science
52 Architecture ( | Landscape [ 1 Sculpture
AM Architecture 1 ] Socie 1/Humon-
f ; Commerce H Literoture itorion
( } Communicotion* [ i Militory ("I Theoter
( ) Conservation Cl Music ( 1 Transportation
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
(late)
n
n
?0th Century
Urbon Planning 0 ther (Specify)
The area of significance of this house is its architecture. The property is also important for its association with Christian Newcomer (1749-1830), a prominent early leader in the Brethren Church.
The house is an excellent example of a five-bay, center hall plan dwelling. Said to have been built by Christian Newcomer between 1795 and 1800, the stone house is an example of a major architectural group in Pennsylvania and Central and Western Maryland. The five-bay house is based remotely on the more formal Georgian plan and was adopted for extensive use in fieldstone and brick farmhouses of the 18th and 19th centuries
This house is one of several stone dwellings dating from the late 18th or early 19th centuries in the Beaver Creek area. Many of these structures are associated with the Newcomer family who moved to Maryland from Lancaster County, Pa. about 1775. The Newcomer family operated several grain mills on the Beaver Creek.
Christian Newcomer who owned this property was a carpenter by trade. After coming to Washington County in 1775, he became active in the early Brethren Church as a circuit-rider who traveled through Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Ohio. He served as Bishop in the church from
1813-1830.
Newcomer acquired 214 acres of land in 1794 from John Ingram. At Christian Newcomer's death in 1830, the property was passed to his son Andrew.


r-t w 'ou { c f i i w n wi m
o .Tibian 16th C%nt\jry
J 15th Century 17fh Cnwry
SPECIFIC CATE'S) (7/ Applicable an J Known)
AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE (Check One or More me Appropriate)
A bof g i no 1 G Educotion
t 1 P r# K t for ( c r Engineering
! 1 Histone ( | Industry
[ 1 Agriculture [ ] Invention
fyi* Architecture { | Londscope
Archi tecture
( 'i Commerce { \ Literoture
[ { Communicotions S Militory
( ) Conservation | 1 Music
55 18th Century ( 1 19th Century
Political R 11 g i on/ Phi.
losophy Science Scu Ipture Soc is I /Humon* i tor ion T heater T ronipoftotion
(late) ?oih c. nfury
Uibon Planning J7j 0b#i (Specify)

O
t-
U
=5
OC
ui
Z
UJ
tn
The area of significance of this house is its architecture. The property is also important for its association with Christian Newcomer (1749-1830), a prominent early leader in the Brethren Church.
The house is an excellent example of a five-bay, center hall plan dwelling. Said to have been built by Christian Newcomer between 1795 and 1800, the stone house is an example of a major architectural group in Pennsylvania and Central and Western Maryland. The five-bay house is based remotely on the more formal Georgian plan and was adopted for extensive use in fieldstone and brick farmhouses of the 18th and 19th centuries
This house is one of several stone dwellings dating from the late 18th or early 19th centuries in the Beaver Creek area. Many of these structures are associated with the Newcomer family who moved to Maryland from Lancaster County, Pa. about 1775. The Newcomer family operated several grain mills on the Beaver Creek.
Christian Newcomer who owned this property was a carpenter by trade. After coming to Washington County in 1775, he became active in the early Brethren Church as a circuit-rider who traveled through Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Ohio. He served as Bishop in the church from 1813-1830.
Newcomer acquired 214 acres of land in 1794 from John Ingram. At Christian Newcomer's death in 1830, the property was passed to his son Andrew.


Holdcraft, Paul E., History of the Pennsylvania Conference. Fayetteville, Pa.: The Craft Press, Inc., 1938.
Williams T. J. C., A History of Washington County, Md., Hagerstown, Md.: Mail Publishing Co., 1906.
10. GEOGRAPHICAL DATA
LATITUDE and longitude coordinates DEFINING a RECTANGLE LOCATING THE PROPERTY
CORNER L ATITJDE LON Gi TUDE
Degrees Minutes Seconds Degrees Minutes Seconds
NW o o
NE o o
SE 0 o
9 o
latitude and longitude COO r dina tes DEFINING the CENTER POINT OF A PROPERTY OF LESS THAN TFN ACRES
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE OF NOM NATED PROPERTY:
LATITUDE LONGI TUDE
Degrees Minutes Seconds 0 Degrees Minutes Seconds o -
130.0 acres
w
IT
it
z
i/i
Acreage Justification:
L ST AlL STATES AND COUNTIES FOR PROPERTIES OVERLAPPING STATE OR COUNTY BOUNDARIES
SATE. C CUN T V
STATE: COUF. T Y
STATE: C OUN TY :
STATE: COUN T Y:
f11 . FORM PREPARED BY
N AME AND TITLE: Paula Stoner Dickey, Consultant
OR G ANI Z A TION Washington County Historic Sites Survey DATE July, 1974
STREET AND NUMBER: Court House Annex
CITY OR TOWN: Hagerstown STATE Maryland
£ n -'State Liaison Officer Review: (Office Use Only)
Significance of this property is:
National Q State Local r~~1
Signature




Home of Christian Newcomer
From this, his home, seven miles southeast of Hagerstown, Maryland, Christian Newcomer made hundreds of horseback Preaching Tours in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky and Canadaall recorded in his journal. The residence is still occupied and in good condition.


SOIL CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTIONS
(Soil Conservation Service; October, 1962)
Soils of Limestone Valleys:
DUNNING SERIES (Dz): Consists of deep, very poorly to poorly drained soils on floodplains. Formed in alluvial material derived mainly from limestone. Typically have a mottled very drak gray surface lay 15 inches thick. Mottled subsoil from 15-40 inches is dark gray silty clay. Mottled sbustratum from 40-72 inches is gray silty clay. Slopes range: 0-3%.
DUFFIELD SERIES (Dm): Consists of deep, well-drained soils on uplands. Formed in material weathered from impure limestone. Typically have a dark grayish brown silt loam surface layer 10 inches thick. Subsoil from 10-53 inches is yellowish-brown and brownish-yellow silty clay loam. Substratum from 53-60 inches is yellowish-brown shaly silty loam.
Slopes range: 0-25%.
FRANKSTOWN SERIES (Fw & Fv): Consists of deep, well-drained soils on uplands.
Formed in material weathered from siliceous limestone and interbedded limy shale. Typically have a dark brown shaly silt loam surface layer 8 inches thick over 4 inches of yellowish-brown shaly silt loam. Subsoil from 12-25 inches is strong brown silt loam and shaly silty clay loam. Substratum from 25-60 inches is strong brown shaly silt clay loam with pockets of shaly silty clay or shaly clay. Slopes range 2-35%.
HAGERSTOWN SERIES (He & Hf): Consists of deep, well-drained, reddish soils on uplands. Formed in materials weathered from hard, fairly pure limestone. Typically have an 8 inch plow layer of brown or dark brown silt loam. Material below this depth and extending rather uniformly to bedrock is generally yellowish-red clay or silty clay, with limestone fragments common in the lower subsoil and in the substratum. Sink holes occur in some places and limestone rock outcrops are common. Slopes range:
0-45%, but most are less than 15%.
HUNTINGTON SERIES (Hw & Hx): Consists of deep, well-drained soils on flood plains. Formed in alluvial material. Typically have a very dark grayish-brown silt loam surface layer 11 inches thick. Subsoil layers from 11-64 inches are dark grayish brown silt loam. Substratum from 64-74 inches is dark brown sandy clay loam. Slopes range: 0-15%.


CLIMATIC DATA SUMMARY
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN J UL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR
Daily max temp F 37.7 40.5 50.7 64.1 74.5 83.0 86.8 84.6 78.0 66.9 52.9 40.1 63.3
Daily min 22.5 24.0 31.2 41.5 51.6 61.0 65.4 63.2 56.0 44.6 34.7 25.0 43.4
Monthly 30.1 32.3 41.0 52.8 63.1 72.0 76.1 73.9 67.0 55.8 43.8 32.6 53.4
Record high 73 75 86 92 97 100 107 101 102 97 84 71 107
Record low -5 -2 8 21 31 41 49 45 30 23 13 -8 -8
Rel humidity Ol hr 69 67 67 67 73 78 79 81 82 79 73 71 74
(%)' 07 hr 71 70 71 70 74 76 78 82 84 82 76 73 76
13 hr 58 55 52 49 51 53 52 54 55 54 56 59 54
19 hr 64 61 57 55 57 60 60 65 68 67 65 64 62
Degree days heating 1082 914 743 369 128 0 0 0 50 292 635 1003 5224
(base 65 F) cooling 0 0 0 0 68 212 344 279 110 7 0 0 1024
Days -hot 90+Fmax 0 0 0 - 1 5 9 6 2 - 0 0 24
-cold 32- max 9 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 5 21
32 min 26 23 17 4 - 0 0 0 - 2 12 23 107
O- min 1 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 1
Days clear 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 9 9 10 6 6 86
partly cloudy 7 7 8 9 10 11 11 10 9 8 9 8 107
cloudy 17 14 16 15 15 13 13 12 12 13 15 17 172
Radiation Btu/sf 535.6 771.0 1083.0 1410.5 16523 1804.6 1763.6 1550.5 1266.6 934.2 578.6 4473 1 149.8
langleys 145.3 209.1 293.8 382.6 448.2 489.5 478.4 420.6 343.6 253.4 157.0 121.3 31 1.9
Precip normal inches 2.57 2.42 3.2 2 2.98 3.76 3.1 1 3.70 3.22 2.66 2.57 3.19 3.07 36.47
Precip davs rain 1 1 10 12 12 12 1 1 10 10 9 8 10 10 125
snow 2 2 2 - 0 0 0 0 0 - 1 2 9
fog 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 20
Wind speed mph 8.3 9.2 9.7 9.4 7.8 6.8 6.3 5.9 6.2 6.6 7.9 8.1 7.7
direction WNW WNW WNW WNW W W W W WNW W WNW WNW WNW