Historic Resources Management Plan -NOV 1991.pdf

Historic Resources Management Plan

SALEMVAMC

Department of Veterans Affairs

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

NOVEMBER 1991

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SALEM VAMC ffiSTORIC RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN

BACKGROUND

In 1987, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), and the Virginia State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) signed an agreement whereby VA agreed to develop and implement an Historic Resources Management Plan (HRPM). This HRMP would provide guidance on the management of historic buildings, structures, landscape elements, and archeological sites at Salem V AMC, which is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

The HRMP was prepared for VA by the planning and architectural firm Sasaki Associates, and by the preservation consultant firm Sorg and Associates. During the development of the HRMP, it was reviewed by the Salem V AMC, V ACO, the State Historic Preservation Office, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.

PURPOSE OF THE HRMP

Carrying out the HRMP will assist in satisfying responsibilities under the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations. More specifically, the HRMP:

• Identifies significant historic resources within the Salem V AMC historic district (including all buildings, structures, open spaces, vistas, landscape, & potential archeological sites).

• Identifies construction and maintenance activities that require outside evaluation by the SHPO and ACHP, and defines specific compliance requirements.

• Describes preservation standards, relates these standards to Salem V AMC, and recommends appropriate techniques for maintaining, repairing, replacing, and restoring significant architectural materials and features.

• Provides recommendations for future construction, regarding siting and appearance, in order to minimize adverse impacts on the Salem V AMC historic district.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This study identified 54 contributing structures and 29 non-contributing structures within the Salem VAMC historic district. Several potential archeological sites were also identified. Overall, the contributing structures at Salem V AMC are in excellent physical condition. Most of the character defining elements essential to the integrity of the historic district are intact.

VA management and engineering staff have achieved VA' s primary health care mission while successfully preserving the historic character of the facility. Even though the. recent major construction project required the demolition of Building #6, the historic compliance process was followed and alternatives to demolition were fully considered. In addition, the new construction is consistent with Federal preservation standards and is compatible with the medical center's overall historic character. It is important to continue to integrate preservation into planning, construction, and maintenance activities. The following recommendations will assist in achieving this goal:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SALEM VAMC IIlSTORIC RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN

1. Balance VA mission with preservation concerns - In most cases, VA can achieve historic preservation requirements while fulfilling VA's health car,e mission. VA should work towards achieving a balance between health care and preservation requirements by fully considering preservation alternatives early in the VA planning and project development process.

2. Encourage rehabilitation and reuse - Prior to acqumng, constructing, or leasing new buildings, VA should use historic buildings to the maximum extent feasible. VA should give full consideration to rehabilitating historic buildings to support VA's mission. Where rehabilitation alternatives are comparable to other alternatives, and where construction and long-term costs are significantly greater, rehabilitation is encouraged. Approaches that integrate preservation considerations are often the most cost effective solutions.

3. Complete compliance requirements - Before implementing construction and maintenance activities, historic compliance requirements need to be met. This includes review and comment by the State Historic Preservation Office as described in this HRMP. The HRMP streamlines the historic compliance process by identifying categories of projects and activities which require minimum or no review by the State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. VA should clarify these requirements by establishing a programmatic agreement between VA and these agencies. The HRMP could serve as a basis for this agreement.

4. Follow preservation standards - VA should consider and follow preservation standards and guidelines established by the Secretary of the Interior and further described in the HRMP for all construction and maintenance activities that may affect historic resources.

5. Proceed with National Register nomination - Information in the HRMP provides the basis for listing the Salem VAMC on the National Register. The medical center has already been determined eligible for listing. A nomination should be prepared and submitted. A listed property is treated the same as a property that has been determined eligible for listing;

however, being listed will provide additional recognition for the Salem V AMC as a significant historic resource.

6. Ensure training and establish a preservation committee - Staff involved with the management of historic resources should be adequately trained in preservation techniques, compliance requirements, and how to use and implement the HRMP. The V AMC Director should establish an ad hoc committee which makes recommendations on ca..rrying out the HRMP and other preservation planning activities. This committee should include representatives from public affairs, engineering staff and other relevant staff offices. In addition, this committee should be responsible for arranging an annual meeting with the Virginia SHPO to review upcoming projects outlined in the station's Five Year Plan.

7. Periodic review of the HRMP - The HRMP will require periodic updating to keep up with the changes to historic resources, changes in management recommendations, and changes in preservation technologies. The chief engineer, with assistance from Central Office facility planners and historic preservation staff, is recommended to review and update the HRMP on a five year or as needed basis.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SALEM VAMC HISTORIC RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SALEM V AMC

The Salem V AMC is significant as an example of an "Architectural Set" hospital, and its institutional Georgian Revival architecture. It is equally significant in the area of federal health care development for veterans. When constructed in 1933-34, it incorporated the most modern mental health philosophies and practices of the time. Other important aspects of the Salem V AMC included its campus setting and its separation of functions into different buildings and floors. VA psychiatric hospitals functioned as self sufficient communities and often contained farming operations, which were considered a major component of the hospital's occupational therapy program.

The historic district includes Building #25, historically known as Edgehill (c.1845). This individually significant building was located on the tract of land purchased by the VA in 1933 and subsequently incorporated into the hospital complex as quarters building. The most intensive construction period for the hospital occurred during and immediately following World War II.

Final Construction Photograph i ◄ ~"4), Building #4, Salem VAMC

Final Construction Photo (1946), Building #77, Salem VAMC

ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN

Veterans Administration Medical Center

Salem~ Virginia

. Jr'";-')\~. ., '-.!J

<g► I ERECTED A ... 0·11934

BY THE

VETERANS

ADMINISTRAT10N

Table of Contents

SECTION I

CHAPTER ONE: Introduction

CHAPTER TWO: History and Significance of the Salem V AMC

CHAPTER THREE: Architectural & Archeological Survey

SECTION II

CHAPTER FOUR: Project Review Requirements

CHAPTER FIVE: Preservation Guidelines

CHAPTER SIX: Cyclical Maintenance Plan

CHAPTER SEVEN: Design & Location Recommendations

APPENDIX

Historic Resources Management Plan

SALEMVAMC

Department of Veterans Affairs

PREPARED BY:

Sorg and Associates 1000 29th Street NW - Washington, D.C.

IN ASSOCIATION WITH

Sasaki Associates 1500 K Street NW - Washington, D.C.

NOVEMBER 1991

E TIO I

IIlSTORIC RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN - SALEM V AMC

SECTION I: TABLE OF CONTEl\TTS

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

. CHAPTER TWO: IDSTORY AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SALEM V AMC

Part I: History of District Page 2-1 Setting. History of the Area. Development of Veterans Services. The Architectural Set. Planning and Site Selection. Construction and Development of the Salem V AMC.

Part II: Significance of District Page 2-11 Architecture. Health/Medicine. Period of Significance. Contributing/Non-Contributing.

Historic District Boundaries. Process for Re-Evaluation of Historic District Boundaries.

Part ill: Sources of Information Page 2-20

CHAPTER THREE: ARCIDTECTURAL & ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Part I:

Part II:

Part ill:

Part IV:

PartV:

Part VI:

Part VII:

Introduction

Architectural Set Buildings East Group. West Group. Utility Group.

Residential Group.

Connecting Corridors

Auxiliary Buildings

Structures

Open Space, Landscape Elements, Vistas

Archeological Resources

Page 3-1

Page 3-6

Page 3-174

Page 3-201

Page 3-254

Page 3-275

Page 3-291

Chapter One

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

In 1987, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), and the Virginia State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) signed an agreement whereby VA agreed to develop and implement an Historic Resources Management Plan (HRPM). This HRMP would provide guidance on the management of historic buildings, structures, landscape elements, and archeological sites at Salem VAMC, which is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

The HRMP was prepared for VA by the planning and architectural firm Sasaki Associates, and by the preservation consultant firm Sorg and Associates. During the development of the HRMP, it was reviewed by the Salem V AMC, V ACO, the State Historic Preservation Office, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.

PURPOSE OF THE HRMP

Carrying out the HRMP will assist in satisfying responsibilities under the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations. More specifically, the HRMP:

• Identifies significant historic resources within the Salem V AMC historic district (including all buildings, structures, open spaces, vistas, landscape, & potential archeological sites).

Identifies construction and maintenance activities that require outside evaluation by the SHPO and ACHP, and defines specific compliance requirements.

• Describes preservation standards, relates these standards to Salem VAMC, and recommends appropriate techniques for maintaining, repairing, replacing, and restoring significant architectural materials and features.

• Provides recommendations for future construction, regarding siting and appearance, in order to minimize adverse impacts on the Salem V AMC historic district.

SUM1\1ARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This study identified 54 contributing structures and 29 non-contributing structures within the Salem V AMC historic district. Several potential archeological sites were also identified. Overall, the contributing structures at Salem V AMC are in excellent physical condition. Most of the character defining elements essential to the integrity of the historic district are intact.

VA management and engineering staff have achieved VA' s primary health care mission while successfully preserving the historic character of the facility. Even though the recent major construction project required the demolition of Building #6, the historic compliance process was followed and alternatives to demolition were fully considered. In addition, the new construction is consistent with Federal preservation standards and is compatible with the medical center's overall

1-1

CHAPrER ONE INTRODUCTION historic character. It is important to continue to integrate preservation into planning, construction, and maintenance activities. The following recommendations will assist in achieving this goal:

1. Balance VA mission with preservation concerns - In most cases, VA can achieve historic preservation requirements while fulfilling VA' s health care mission. VA should work towards achieving a balance between health care and preservation requirements by fully considering preservation early in the VA planning and project development process.

2. Encourage rehabilitation and reuse - Prior to acquiring, constructing, or leasing new buildings, VA should use historic buildings to the maximum extent feasible. VA should give full consideration to rehabilitating historic buildings to support VA's mission. Where rehabilitation alternatives are comparable to other alternatives, and where construction and long-term costs are significantly greater, rehabilitation is encouraged. Approaches that integrate preservation considerations are often the most cost effective solutions.

3. Complete compliance requirements - Before implementing construction and maintenance activities, historic compliance requirements need to be met. This includes review and comment by the State Historic Preservation Office as described in this HRMP. The HRMP streamlines the historic compliance process by identifying categories of projects and activities which require minimum or no review by the State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. VA should clarify these requirements by establishing a programmatic agreement between VA and these agencies. The HRMP could serve as a basis for this agreement.

4. Follow preservation standards - VA should consider and follow preservation standards and guidelines established by the Secretary of the Interior and further described in the HRMP for all construction and maintenance activities that may affect historic resources.

5. Proceed with National Register nomination - Information in the HRMP provides the basis for listing the Salem V AMC on the National Register. The medical center has already been determined eligible for listing. A nomination should be prepared and submitted. A listed property is treated the same as a property that has been determined eligible for listing;

however, being listed will provide additional recognition for the Salem V AMC as a significant historic resource.

6. Ensure training and establish a preservation committee - Staff involved with the management of historic resources should be adequately trained in preservation techniques, compliance requirements, and how to use and implement the HRMP. The V AMC Director should establish an ad hoc committee which makes recommendations on carrying out the HRMP and other preservation planning activities. This committee should include representatives from public affairs, engineering staff and other relevant staff offices. In addition, this committee should be responsible for arranging an annual meeting with the Virginia SHPO to review upcoming projects outlined in the station's Five Year Plan.

7. Periodic review of the HRMP - The HRMP will require periodic updating to keep up with the changes to historic resources, changes in management recommendations, and changes in preservation technologies. The chief engineer, with assistance from Central Office facility

1-2

CHAPI'ER. ONE JNTRODUCTION

planners and historic preservation staff, is recommended to review and update the HRMP on a five year or as needed basis.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SALEM V AMC

The Salem V AMC is significant as an example of an "Architectural Set" hospital, and its institutional Georgian Revival architecture. It is equally significant in the area of federal health care development for veterans. When constructed in 1933-34, it incorporated the most modern mental health philosophies and practices of the time. Other important aspects of the Salem V AMC included its campus setting and its separation of functions into different buildings and floors. VA psychiatric hospitals functioned as self sufficient communities and often contained farming operations, which were considered a major component of the hospital's occupational therapy program.

The historic district includes Building #25, historically known as Edgehill ( c.1845). This individually significant building was located on the tract of land purchased by the VA in 1933 and subsequently incorporated into the hospital complex as quarters building. The most intensive construction period for the hospital occurred during and immediately following World War II.

CONTRIBUTING AND NON-CONTRIBUTING RESOURCES

1. All resources designed by the Veterans Administration Construction Service Division and related to the Architectural Set Plan construction program have been determined Contributinl;! - Primary. These resources--including both major buildings, support buildings, and objects-- establish the architectural character of the site and are strongly associated with the preeminent historical theme of the district: the Architectural Set Plan.

Edgehill, as mentioned previously, independently meets the National Register Criteria and is therefore a Contributing - Primary resource of the historic district.

Contributing - Primary Resources: Buildings 1-28, 74-77, Connecting Corridors, Old Water Tank (24), Flag Pole (49).

2. Resources not associated with the Architectural Set Plan but associated with sub-themes, such as the self-sufficient nature of the hospital community, and the use of recreational and occupational therapies, have been determined Contributinl;! - Secondary.

3.

Contributing - Secondary Resources: Buildings 31, 34, 35, 46, 72, 80, 85, 92, 97, 102, 116, 117, 120.

Resources that do not to contribute to the historic or architectural significance of the facility;

are not associated with any sub-themes, such as the self-sufficient nature of the hospital community, and the use of recreational and occupational therapies; or have been altered to such an extent that they no longer retain their historic integrity have been determined Non Contributin&:.

Non-Contributing Resources: Buildings 121, 126, 133, 134, 138-142, 144-147, X, Rose Garden, Tennis Court, Pool (29), New Water Tank (125), Grandstand (130), Substation (131), Picnic Shelters, Oxygen Supply Stations.

1-3

CHAPI'ER ONE INTRODUCTION

l\.fETHODOLOGY

The methodology utilized to prepare this document is as follows:

1. Historic Research: In preparing this document, available resources were utilized to establish the historic significance of the Salem VAMC. The sources utilized during this historic research process include:

• Local records (permits, deeds, and titles)

• Local histories

• Department of Veterans Affairs resources (located both at the Facility and at the Washington, D.C. office).

• Interviews

2. Field Surveys: A visual survey of both the architectural and archeological resources located at the Salem V AMC was conducted by the preservation consultant.

3. Review and Integration of Current Preservation Standards and Guidelines: Preservation guidelines and references were reviewed and integrated into the HRMP. Sensitivity to the proper interpretation of these standards and guidelines was taken when providing recommendations for the facility.

4. Continual Input from the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Virginia SHPO, and the Advisory Council: It is of importance that the HRMP be a useful and effective document to all of those individuals and agencies utilizing it. Thus, when developing the HRMP, all documented concerns were integrated into the document.

PLAN CONTENTS

Chapter Two: History and Significance of the Salem V AMC. The first portion of this chapter gives a brief overview of the history of the area, and outlines the history of the property, the development of the Veterans Administration hospital system, and the development of the site.

Following this, the facility is discussed in terms of its significance to the development of neuropsychiatric treatment and to the development of veteran's health care services. In addition, the chapter discusses the significance of the "Architectural Set" and the Georgian Revival style of architecture, which together give Salem V AMC its distinctive architectural character. Finally, Building #25 is discussed as an independently significant resource.

The ultimate purpose of this chapter is to develop a basis for determining the significance of each resource, and to establish a district boundary.

Chapter Three: Architectural and Archeological Survey. The chapter individually documents each resource at the Salem V AMC by providing a range of information, including: construction date, historic name, historic function, current use, future treatment category, significance to the site, floor plan, site location, documentation available, photographs, a general description of the building, a statement of significance, and significant architectural features. For buildings determined to be Contributing - Primary (those which must be maintained according to historic preservation

1-4

CHAPr.ER ONE INTRODUCTION standards), the survey identifies primary and secondary facades, recommends treatment for existing materials, and identifies and evaluates (using the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation) significant alterations to the resource. Most importantly, however, the survey is cross-referenced with relevant chapters of the HRMP such as Chapter Four: Future Treatment Categories, Chapter Five: Preservation Guidelines, Chapter Six: Cyclical Maintenance Plan, and Chapter Seven: Design and Location Recommendations.

Also included in this chapter is a Phase I Archeology Report. The report identifies potential archeological sites at the Salem VAMC.

Chapter Four: Project Review Reguirements. Chapter Two of the HRMP places resources at the Salem V AMC into one of four Future Treatment Categories. These categories distinctly outline the obligations of the Department of Veterans Affairs in terms of routine and preventative maintenance, replacement and restoration, major additions, and demolition. Where relevant, the treatment categories refer to other chapters of the Historic Resources Management Plan. Generally, Contributing - Primary resources fall into Future Treatment Category One; Contributing - Secondary resources fall into Future Treatment Category Two; Non-Contributing resources fall into Future Treatment Category Three; and archeological resources and landscape elements fall into Future Treatment Category Four.

Chapter Five: Preservation Guidelines. The purpose of this chapter is to provide guidelines for future additions, alterations, repair, and maintenance to contributing resources, and to provide guidelines for the preservation of the site as a whole. These guidelines are interpretations of relevant sections of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation that have been adapted to the address specific issues at the Salem VAMC. They provide guidance for items, such as building materials, window patterns, roof types, massing, porches, porticos, and vistas, that define the historic character of contributing resources. The chapter is cross-referenced with Chapter Six: Cyclical Maintenance Plan and Chapter Seven: Design and Location Recommendations. Both of these chapters provide more specific, technical information concerning the maintenance, repair, and addition to contributing resources.

Chapter Six: Cyclical Maintenance Plan. This chapter addresses the treatment of contributing resources in terms of their materials and components. Whenever "Maintain" is listed in the survey (Chapter Three) for a material, it means that the element should be maintained according to the guidelines and recommendations outlined in Chapter Six: Cyclical Maintenance Plan. The following information is provided for each material: the buildings where the material may be found; typical architectural features constructed of the material; guidelines for the inspection of the material; types of deterioration that accompany the material; how often the material requires repair or replacement;

and treatment specifications and recommendations for the material. In addition, inspection checklists and a Master Maintenance Schedule have been provided. Specifications for the materials have been drawn from currently accepted historic preservation literature provided by federal agencies.

Chapter Seven: Design and Location Recommendations. The purpose of this chapter is to provide the Salem VAMC with design guidance for new construction. Such construction includes both additions and the construction of new buildings within the historic district. The chapter provides guidelines which will aid in the design process. The discussion of additions and new construction includes: a general approach to design, location preferences, shapes & sizes, heights, 1-5

CHAPI'ERONE INTRODUCTION

roof forms, rhythm of solid to void, proportion of openings, entrance treatments, window design, materials, colors, & architectural detaiis.

NOTE:

NOTE:

References to "Veterans Administration" throughout the document should be recognized as the "Department of Veterans Affairs" (except when "Veterans Administration" is being used in an historical context).

References to the "S-VAMC" throughout the document should be recognized as the "Salem V AMC."

1-6

Part I:

Part II:

Part III:

Chapter Two

IDSTORY & SIGNIFICANCE

OF THE SALEM VAMC

CONTENTS

History of the District Page 2-1 Setting. History of the Area.

Development of Veterans Services. The Architectural Set. Planning and Site Selection. Construction & Development of the Salem VAMC.

Significance of the District Page 2-11 Architecture. Health and Medicine.

Period of Significance. Contributing & Non-Contributing Resources. Historic District Boundaries. Process for Re- Evaluation of Existing District Boundaries.

Sources of Information Page 2-20

PART I: HISTORY OF THE S-VAMC DISTRICT

Setting

The Salem Veterans Administration Hospital was constructed in 1933, on a rural site midway between cities of Roanoke and Salem, Virginia. As Roanoke was the larger of the two cities, the facility was originally named the Roanoke Veterans Administration Hospital. In 1960, however, the hospital was annexed to the city of Salem and its name subsequently changed to the Salem Veterans Administration Medical Center (S-V AMC).

The hospital reservation is currently located within the City of Salem, approximately 1.75 miles west of the City of Roanoke. The complex is bound on the north by Roanoke Boulevard, on the east by park land owned by the City of Roanoke, on the south by river-front property owned by the Norfolk and Western Railroad, and on the west by property owned by the Roanoke Vocational Technical School (east of Mason's Creek). The site is situated approximately 1100 feet above sea level on a bluff overlooking the Roanoke River and the rolling terrain of the Roanoke Valley. The surrounding Blue Ridge and Allegheny Mountains can be seen from several vantage points on the grounds of the reservation.

The hospital site originally consisted of 447.72 acres, acquired from local property owners John H. Parrott and J.C. Haley in 1933. In subsequent years, however, the U.S. Government gradually sold much of the facility's excess land. In 1989, the rectangular-shaped S-V AMC is comprised of 225 acres and 83 buildings, structures, objects and sites. In 1980 S-V AMC was determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

History of the Area

The Roanoke Valley had long been a pathway and favored hunting spot for Indians when the first European explorers arrived in the late 17th century. Abundant salt licks found.in the wet lowlands near the Roanoke River attracted herds of buffalo and other game. In order to improve the hunting, the natives cleared many acres (near the present center of Roanoke) encourage the buffalo to graze. Despite the long Indian presence in the valley, they do not appear to have established villages, but, rather, temporary hunting camps. When the first settlers arrived in the valley, there were no Indians in residence. However, friction between European settlers and Indians did arise later in the 18th century with the French and Indian Wars.

The first settlers began to establish farms by 1740. Among them were John Mason and Peter Evans, who established farms on Masons Creek and the Roanoke River, both of which are in the vicinity of the S-V AMC. Migration, mostly from Pennsylvania and eastern Virginia, increased throughout the 1740s and 1750s as the trail through the valley was cleared. The first roads through the valley followed Indian and Buffalo trails, which took the easiest grades, and provided an outlet for the settlers' products as well as an entre for the pioneers. By 1753, the population of the Roanoke valley was approximately 35 families, and by 1770 it was great enough to warrant a petition for the establishment of a new county, (Botetourt County). The American Revolution brought a renewal of tensions with the Indians and economic hardship, but no battles, to the Roanoke Valley.

During the latter part of the 18th century and early 19th century, farms were widley scattered

2-1

CHAPTER 1WO: PART I HISTORY OF DISTRICT

and generally large, some as much as 2,000. While some residents of the vailey owned slaves, slave owning was not as prevalent as in the eastern and southern parts of the state.

Agricultural products included hemp, corn, flax, hay, barley, beans and root crops and tobacco.

The town of Salem was incorporated in 1806 and quickly prospered. In 1838, the section of Botetourt County where the S-V AMC its new location became Roanoke County, with Salem as its seat. The Virginia and Tennessee Railroad arrived in 1852, and with it a rejuvenated economy based on tobacco warehousing and processing.

Still relatively isolated, the Roanoke Valley was affected less by the Civil War than many other communities in the state. However, in 1864, Union troops destroyed stores in Salem and disabled the railroad. Prosperity soon after the war returned to the war-torn area and an economic boom was created by the extension of the rail system. The Shenandoah Valley Railroad was constructed in the early 1880s and connected to Norfolk and Western Railroad, which had acquired the old Virginia and Tennessee line. Roanoke became a regional rail hub and railroad shops, housing for railroad workers, hotels, stores and industries sprang up rapidly. By 1920 the city had a population of 50,000.

As with the Revolutiona:ry War and Civil War, the area passed through the Great Depression relatively unscathed. In 1930 only 2 percent of Roanoke's population was unemployed. The area did however receive assistance from New Deal programs, one of which was the construction of the Veterans Hospital in Roanoke under the Public Works Assistance program (White, 1982).

Development of Veterans Services

The United States government has provided benefits to its disabled veterans since August 26, 1776, when the Continental Congress passed a resolution to provide a pension for veterans disabled while serving in the armed forces (Weber and Schmeckebier, 1934:4). As milita:ry involvement in the post-Revolutiona:ry War era increased the demand for milita:ry pensions, the need to form a federal office to regulate and administer the pension program became increasingly apparent. For this reason, on March 2, 1833 ( 4 Stat.L. 622), the Bureau of Pensions was formally authorized by Congress (Weber and Schmeckebier, 1934:207).

The next major act benefitting veterans was passed on March 3, 1865 (13 Stat.L. 509). This law provided for the establishment of milita:ry and naval asylums, and the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers. These facilities were created primarily as domicilia:ry homes for disabled veterans who fought in the Union Army during the Civil War. However, only a minimal amount of health care was provided.

The creation of the Bureau of War Risk Insurance on October 6, 1917 (Public Law 90), was spurred by the United States' commitment to World War I. In general, this Bureau provided for the administration of veterans compensation, medical and hospi\al services, rehabilitation, and insurance (Weber and Schmeckebier, 1934:4). The Bureau of War Risk Insurance, however, was burdened with increased responsibilities as veteran's claims rose in the post war era. As a result, some services were transferred to other Federal agencies: the United States Public Health Service assumed the responsibility of providing medical and hospital services; and the Federal Board for Vocational Rehabilitation assumed the responsibility of organizing the vocational rehabilitation program (Weber and Schmeckebier, 1934:4). By 1919, despite the

2-2 appropriation of millions of dollars for the provision of veteran's services, the Public Health Service determined that the availability of government beds was inadequate. To compensate for this, the overload of veterans health care services was contracted to civilian hospitals.

On March 4, 1921, an additional $18,600,000 was appropriated to the Supervising Architect's Office of the Secretary of the Treasury for the construction of more government hospital facilities. However, sites selected for these facilities were criticized as being located too far from needy veteran populations, requiring veterans to leave family and friends to seek treatment. Hence, it was determined that all future facilities be constructed near centers of veteran populations (Weber and Schmeckebier, 1934:15-16). From this point forward, demographics played an important role in determining the site of a veterans hospital or home.

In 1921, the United States Veterans Bureau was formed, and on April 29, 1922, it assumed responsibility for fifty-seven veterans hospitals operated by the United States Public Health Service. Nine more hospitals, at the time under construction by the Treasury Department, were later transferred to the Veterans Bureau (Weber and Schmeckebier, 1934:16-17). On July 21, 1930, the Veterans Bureau, the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers, and the Bureau of Pensions were consolidated into the Veterans Administration. General Frank T. Hines, who had been director of the Veterans Bureau since 1923, was named as the administrator of the new agency (Morris, 1944:18).

The Architectural Set

The obvious and immediate concern of the newly formed Veterans Administration was the provision of quality veterans health care services that were convenient to the veteran population. In an attempt to address these concerns, the Veterans Administration adopted the concept of the "architectural set," an idea originally developed by the Veterans Bureau.

The design strategy proved to be extremely effective, and as a result, fifty veterans hospitals built between 1921 and 1946 were designed and constructed according architectural set criteria.

The success of the architectural set was a direct result of the Veterans Administration's ability to identify with veteran's needs and to apply input from physicians and other knowledgeable personnel. For instance, two major factors influencing the design of the architectural set were:

the late 19th century advances in the understanding and control of bacteria; and the relatively new idea of "nursing efficiency," which promoted the placement of various types of treatment wards in the same building, several stories in height (Morris, 1944:14).

The concept of the architectural set was simple, all buildings serving a common purpose would share a common floor plan. For instance, every building constructed by the Veterans Administration to be used for surgical purposes would have a similar floor plan. In addition to this, however, the Veterans Administration also developed standardized floor plans for three types of hospitals: neuro-psychiatric, tubercular, and general medical and surgical. In general, the size of a reservation was dictated by the hospital type, and the number of veterans needing assistance in a particular area. To help assimilate the facilities with the localities they were placed in, the Veterans Administration also had the foresight to reflect local and regional architectural designs in the facades of the buildings.

According to design criteria developed by the Veterans Administration, neuro-psychiatric facilities, such as the S-V AMC, required approximately 400-500 acres of land. The large amount of land was necessary since occupational and recreational therapies were a significant

2-3 part of a patient's treatment. Occupational activities included raising pigs and cattle, working in fields, and maintaining vegetable and flower gardens. Recreational activities planned for the veterans included softball, golf, croquet, and walks around the grounds of the reservation. A large site also permitted the neuro-psychiatric patients a measure of freedom and privacy, and allowed the Veterans Administration to expand when necessary. Tubercular and general medical and surgical hospitals did not require as much acreage (100 acres and 50-100 acres, respectively) nor as many beds (Morris, 1944:28).

Planning and Site Selection

The S-V AMC is typical of the architectural set neuro-psychiatric hospitals constructed by the Veterans Administration between 1920 and 1946. Since the plans for such a hospital were standardized by the Veterans Administration, buildings located in neuro-psychiatric hospitals were typical according to their use. Although the number of each type of building varies from facility to facility, the following is a list of typical structures found in a Veterans Administration Architectural set neuro-psychiatric hospital:

Main Building This building was the site of the medical and surgical procedures. Services available in this building included administrative space, operating rooms, a receiving ward, dental examination rooms, and some therapeutic treatment rooms. Patients requiring care for physical illnesses were also treated in this building.

Acute Building This type of building contained wards devoted to the care and treatment of extremely disturbed patients who required extensive ongoing neuro-phychiatric treatments.

Infirmary Building These buildings contained beds for patients whose mental and physical conditions were deteriorating to the point where they could not take care of themselves, thus requiring constant care.

Parole Building This type of building housed patients who were able to care for themselves with minimal supervision and who were preparing to leave the hospital.

Dining Hall Building This structure contained a large dining room and food storage and preparation areas.

Recreation Building This building contained patient lounges, an auditorium, and the libraries for patients and physicians.

Residential and Quarters Buildings These buildings provided housing for nurses and physicians.

2-4

CHAPTER TWO: PART I HISTORY OF DISTRICT

Utility Group These ancillary buildings contributed to the operation of the reservation. They included the laundry, boiler house, storehouse, shops, and garages.

Connecting Corridors These brick structures were usually enclosed, provided patient control, and provided protection from adverse weather conditions for patients and staff. All buildings in the main hospital group were connected by these corridors.

The original S-V AMC plan of 1934 called for the construction of twenty-two hospital, residential, and utility buildings (Buildings# 1-# 22). Included along with these buildings were a number of ancillary, farm, storage, and garage structures. The existing Parrott House, the residence of the property's previous owner, was also integrated into the S-V AMC design. The existing facility is in fact based upon the original plan, but shows some variation. For example, the 1934 plan called for a much larger Administration Building (Building# 1) and for several buildings which were never constructed ( a patient building, Building # 3, and several residential buildings# 20-# 22). However, the plan was intended to expand with the needs of the veteran population and thus four buildings not shown on the original plan were added to the west side of the campus during World War II.

The S-V AMC was constructed in the Georgian Revival style. Of all the styles employed for the Veterans Administration's fifty architectural set hospitals, (which included French Chateau, Spanish Colonial, Egyptian Revival, J acobethan and other styles), the Georgian Revival style was used most frequently. Another important aspect of the facility's design was its landscape.

The landscape plans show detailed planting schemes involving a variety of shrubs and trees, including many mature trees brought in from the surrounding woods. The Veterans Administration considered an attractive, bucolic environment to be an integral part of the neuro-psychiatric treatment process.

Just as the design of the facility was given much attention, the Veterans Administration also considered the site selection process to be of utmost importance. The Roanoke area was first chosen by the Veterans Administration as the home of a new general medical and surgical hospital. However, after President Franklin Delano Roosevelt took office, the National Economy Act of 1933 was passed and all plans for the construction of new Veterans Administration Hospitals were halted. At this time, the criteria for determining which veterans were eligible for health care benefits were modified. This change in policy led to a reduction in the number of veterans eligible to receive health care from the Veterans Administration.

To facilitate the construction of the S-V AMC under the new rules, the designation of the Roanoke site was changed from general medical and surgical to neuro-psychiatric. Also instrumental in getting the project started in the midst of the depression was the transfer of the project to the newly established Public Works Administration.

Politics aside, several other criteria, such as demographics, public transportation, future land uses1 soil fertility, and topography, also played an important role in determining whether the Roanoke site was suitable for a neuro-psychiatric hospital. Veterans population statistics were studied to determine where and what kind of health care services were needed. Another factor was transportation; the hospitals had to be easily accessible to patients, visitors and the staff.

The growing use of the automobile and public transportation in the early thirties permitted the placement of neuro-psychiatric hospitals in suburban and rural areas, an environment that was

2-5 considered beneficial to the treatment of patients (Morris, 1944:24). The S-V AlvfC site, conveniently located between Roanoke and Salem and accessible via the Roanoke Safety Motor Transit Corporation, was considered acceptable under this criterion.

It was not considered beneficial for hospitals to be located near noisy and/ or odiferous enterprises, nor was it desirable to be in proximity to commercial properties. For these reasons, existing and future land use plans were important factors of the site selection process.

Neuro-psychiatric hospitals, in particular, were located in rural and suburban areas that were expected to remain as such (Morris, 1944:24). Again, the S-V AMC site, which was surrounded by rural farm land, was considered acceptable under this criterion.

According to Veterans Administration standards, a neuro-psychiatric reservation required between 400 and 500 acres of land. This size not only allowed for the construction of a facility that could accommodate between 1000 and 2000 beds, but also permitted the agricultural activities that were part of a patients' occupational therapy. Therefore, suitable soil conditions and the availability of large tracts of tillable land were an important consideration in the site selection process (Morris, 1944:28). The 238.5-acre John H. Parrott property and the adjacent 209.22-acre J.C. Haley property were chosen because of their substantial size and because they existed, in part, as workable farmland.

Finally, the Veterans Administration felt that the property under consideration should be higher than that its adjoining properties. This would give the facility an impressive presence and allow views of the surrounding countryside. At the same time, it was important that the property be fairly level and that existing slopes be as gentle as possible. These characteristics would both expedite construction and reduce soil erosion (Morris, 1944:28-30). The S-V AMC site, which is situated on a plateau overlooking farmland in the Roanoke Valley and has excellent views of the surrounding mountains, was considered acceptable under this criterion.

Construction and Development of the S-V AMC

The Public Works Administration allocated $1,350,000 for the construction of the 475-bed facility, $66,750 of which was used to acquire the property. Colonel L.H. Tripp, Chief of the Veterans Administration Construction Service Division in Washington, supervised the preparation of plans and acted as Director of Construction. A graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Boston, Tripp was in charge of mechanical design for Army construction during World War I and was appointed Chief of the Construction Division, Veterans Bureau, in March 1923. When the Veterans Administration was created, he was appointed Chief of the Construction Service Division, which consisted of a Maintenance and Operation Division and a Technical Service Division (Morris, 1944:20). The Technical Service Division, which included Architectural, Specifications, Engineering and Structural Sub-Divisions, was of particular importance in that it was responsible for preliminary studies regarding the selection of new sites for Veterans Administration Facilities, inspection and surveys of new sites to form the basis of subsequent design, and the preparation of plans and specifications (Morris, 1944:20). It was the responsibility of this Division to design Veterans Administration hospitals, and the S-V AMC is included among one of its early accomplishments.

Once the plans were developed in Washington, the Veterans Administration appointed on site (in-house) personnel to supervise the project. The supervisors of the Salem project included: Captain P.M. Feltham, Supervisor of Construction, and his assistants T.G. Dodd, 2-6

Fi re 2-1: Ori :nal Site Ma , 1933

Z.•

I I

Fi

Fi!mre 2-3: Map Showin Land Uses and Pre-existin Farm Houses

1,·,· ·~~, '' -, ... •· r I "I['\ 1~ i ~ I \ ~L~ l. ~ ,, :. ' It.·.

"'-< ,,,,,-· I

'i

I ••

, ·i I '\ , . •,· J, ·,;:.

-; ::_:i ;~~:.;::··.,;,;,>.: ;_1t~:~/i .. ,.

Superintendent of General Construction, and W.R. Johnston, Superintendent of Mechanical Installation (Five, 1935).

The principal contractors, as reported by an April 28, 1935, edition of The Roanoke Times, were: for general construction, Algernon Blair of Montgomery, Alabama; for plumbing, heating and electrical work, the Redmon Heating Company, of Louisville, Kentucky; for refrigeration and ice making, the Columbus Iron Works of Columbus, Georgia; for water tank and tower, Tippett and Wood, of Phillipsburg, New Jersey; and for elevator installation, the Westbrook Elevator Manufacturing Company, of Danville, Virginia.

A complete listing of subcontractors is given in an April 28, 1935 edition of The Roanoke Times. Below are just some of the many listed: Monon Stone Company, Bloomington, IN, cut limestone; American Sheet Metal Works, New Orleans, LA, lightproof windows; A.G.

Wilson, Lithonia, GA, rubble stone; United States Gypsum Company, Plasterco, VA, all plaster materials; Capitol Concrete Company, Jacksonville, FL, ready mixed concrete; Homer B Maxwell, Atlanta, GA, engineering, shop drawings; Marshall Lumber Company, Montgomery, AL, lumber; Virginia Bridge and Iron Company, Roanoke, VA, furnishing and erecting structural steel work; Hinkle Brother Company, Birmingham, AL, furnishing and installing roofing and sheet metal work; David E. Kennedy, Inc., Chicago, IL, furnishing and installing asphalt tile, linoleum and rubber tile; Roanoke Iron and Bridge Works Company, Roanoke, VA, furnishing and installing miscellaneous iron and ornamental iron work; Roanoke Marble and Granite Company, Roanoke, VA, setting marble and soapstone; Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company, Birmingham, AL, glass and glazing; Brown-Rogers Wall Paper and Paint Company, Birmingham, AL, painting and finishing; Sargent and Company, New Haven, CO,· finishing hardware; Exchange Lumber Company, Roanoke, VA, millwork; Old Virginia Brick Company, Salem, VA, face brick and special brick; Georgia Marble Company, Atlanta, GA, interior marble; and Walter S. Phelps Granite Company, Washington, DC, granite.

The massive construction project had a great impact on the surrounding community, which like so many, was suffering from the depression. As the construction money was granted by the public works fund, the project was subject to public works rules and regulations, which stipulated that: only domestically produced materials should be employed, as far as possible local materials should be used, no convict labor would be barred, preference in employment would be given to veterans and local labor, and, in order to give employment to the greatest number of people, a 30-hour week and 8-hr day would be in effect (Veteran Hospital Job, 1933). Although local businesses did not receive any of the major contracts, they did provide important subcontracting services during the construction of the S-V AMC. Among other items, local contractors provided brick, rubble, tile, terrazzo, ornamental iron work, finishing hardware, and lumber for the construction of the S-V AMC. Those materials and services not available in the local economy were contracted to outside, primarily regional, businesses.

On October 19, 1934, approximately 25,000 people…