|UFDC Home||myUFDC Home | Help|
This item has the following downloads:
1 A MORE INCLUSIVE APPROACH TO ASSESSING CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUES: THE GOVERNMENT HOUSE, ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA By BLAIR BRYANT MULLINS A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2012
2 2012 Blair Bryant Mullins
3 To Adam: you are my rock
4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge my chair, Morris Hylton III. to detail, dedication to my e ducation, and hours of revising, this thesis would not be what it is today. I would also like to thank Dr. Dawn Jourdan and Dr. Margaret Portillo for their support and methodology expertise during thi s process. Clarissa Carr was a devoted friend and colleague during the data collection portion of this study. My parents, as usual were supportive even if they had no idea what a Master in Historic Preservation entails Thank you to Cindy and Joe Monta lto for finding the preservationist inside of me. Lastly, Adam Knighting deserves the biggest thank you for pushing me to do what I am most passionate about.
5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 7 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 8 LIST OF DEFINI TIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 9 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 12 Opening Remarks ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 12 Purpose Statement ................................ ................................ ................................ 15 2 ASSESSING CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUES: A LITE RATURE REVIEW .......... 19 United States ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 20 International ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 22 Existing Appro aches to Assessing Values ................................ .............................. 24 New Approaches to Assessing Values ................................ ................................ ... 27 3 THE GOVERNMENT HOUSE, ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA ................................ 34 Establishment of St. Augustine ................................ ................................ ............... 34 Law of the Indies ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 36 The Government House ................................ ................................ .......................... 37 Preserving St. Augustine ................................ ................................ ........................ 44 Government House and St. Augustine Today ................................ ......................... 45 4 RESEARCH METHODS ................................ ................................ ......................... 50 Social Science Methodology ................................ ................................ ................... 50 Expert Stakeholder Group: ................................ ................................ ..................... 52 Details and Interview Results: ................................ ................................ ................. 54 Non Expert Stakeholder Group: ................................ ................................ .............. 56 5 ANALYSIS OF DATA RESEARCH ................................ ................................ ......... 61 Phase One: Data Discussion ................................ ................................ .................. 61 Ph ase Two: Data Discussion ................................ ................................ .................. 64 Stakeholder Groups Combined ................................ ................................ ............... 66
6 6 CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 68 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 71 Future Recommend ations ................................ ................................ ....................... 72 APPENDIX A INTERVIEW SHEET FOR UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA STAKEHOLDERS ............ 75 B INTERVIEW SHEET FOR ST. AUGUSTINE STAKEHOLDERS ............................ 79 C EXPERT STAKEHOLDER MATRIX ................................ ................................ ....... 83 D NON EXPERT GROUP QUESTIONNAIRE ................................ ............................ 87 E NON EXPERT GROUP VALUES PHOTO ELICITATION HANDOUT .................... 88 F NON EXPERT GROUP GOVERNMENT HOUSE INFORMATIONAL HANDOUT ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 89 G INFORMED CONSENT FORM ................................ ................................ ............... 90 H NON EXPERT GROUP MATRIX ................................ ................................ ............ 91 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................... 94 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ............................ 99
7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 5 1 Ex ................................ ................................ ............. 63 5 2 most significant socio cultural value ................................ ............. 65 5 3 least significant socio cultural value ................................ ............. 65 5 4 best use for the Gove rnment House ................................ ............ 65
8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 3 1 A photo of a map of St. Augustine in1593. ................................ ......................... 36 3 2 Painting of the Governor's House in the 1760s. ................................ ................. 39 3 3 Government House after the Robert Mills renovation (1864). ............................ 40 3 4 Government House used as a post office (dated 1906). ................................ .... 41 3 5 Postcard of the Government Hou se (dated 1922). ................................ ............. 42 3 6 Current Government House after the 1936 WPA reconstruction. ....................... 43
9 LIST OF D EFINITIONS Action Research uses research methods to engage stakeholders in the process to help facilitate change. Expert Stakeholder For the purposes of this study: A person from the University of Florida or St. Augustine who is either very knowledgeable about the Government House or the transferring of the thirty two buildings from the City of St. Augustine to the University of Florida Fabric based Focusing on the material aspect of a historic site Integrity A factor in determining whether a historic resource is added to the National Register of Historic Places. It has a lot to do with how much a resource has changed over time. Non E xpert Stakeholder For the purposes of this study: A person that is not as knowledgeable as an expert, as defined above, a resident, or visitor of St. Augustine. Significance Why a resource is important and appreciated Stakeholder A person who uses a site or is involved in some way with the site Value Synonymous with significance Values centered Focusing more on the intangible aspects of a historic site such as; social value and cultural value.
10 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Historic Preservation A MORE INCLUSIVE APPROACH TO ASSESSING CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUES: THE GOVERNMENT HOUSE, ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA By Blai r Bryant Mullins May 2012 Chair: Morris Hylton III Major: Historic Preservation Assessing and articulating the values associated with a heritage site is a critical first step in its preservation, interpretation, and stewardship. In the United States, most cultural heritage specialists use the National Register of Historic Places criteria to help determine the significance or value of a heritage site. These criteria can be limiting and based mostly on the physical aspects of the site rather than more i ntangible aspects. However, there is a growing movement in the cultural heritage field to move from the traditional, fabric based approach to assessing significance to a more values centered approach. A more values centered approach tends to involve a wi der range of stakeholders in the process. When a values centered approach is used and more stakeholders are involved, the knowledge and understanding of the site is more inclusive, representing a wider range of values associated with it. This thesis aims to identify a more inclusive approach to assessing cultural heritage values. The case study is the Government House in St. Augustine, Florida. Originally constructed in 1713 as a part of the original Spanish plaza the Government House has been modified and reconstructed extensively over the years. More recently,
11 the University of Florida assumed responsibility for the building and initiated plans to rehabilitate and reuse the structure. Over several months, two groups of stakeholders were identified an d categorized University of Florida and the City of St. Augustine was interviewed using a semi structured process. The non experts were chosen randomly outside of the Government House and were approached with a short, concise questionnaire. Both groups were asked questions about the values associated with the Government House and their opinions of how the building should be used. While the expert group and the non expert group v alued the building differently, they all agreed that the building should continue to be used primarily for community and social events. These results show that stakeholders value heritage sites differently and that each perception is important to understan ding and preserving historic resources.
12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Opening Remarks A first critical step in preserving a heritage site is the identification and articulation of values associated with it. Values also ref erred to as significance help inform and guide all decisions and interventions at heritage sites However, th ere is a growing recognition among cultural heritage special ists both domestically and internationally that current approaches and guidelines for evaluating heritage values are limiting 1 Currently, experts focus mostly on historical and/or aesthetic significance 2 However, this top down approach does not fully c apture all the values stakeholders, especially everyday ordinary users, associate with a site. 3 Traditionally an outside expert is hired to research and analyze the property to determine the significance of the property or landscape. In the United State s, in most cases th is and apply the National Register of Historic Places Criteria 4 for evaluating the site (which will be discussed in greater length in Chapter 2). The expert typically surveys the site to determine su ch things as the character defining features and how the site has changed over time. Historical research to determine information such as such construction dates and ownership history is also involved in this approach. The National Register of Historic Places was e stablished as part of the National Preservation Act of 1966 5 The criteria have not changed considerably since that point which was over fifty years ago. This insinuates that views of significance have not changed. Scholars and preservation ists such as Randall Mason are promoting a more values centered approach
13 heritage is limited is not just restricted to the field of preservation other disciplines such as urban planning, archa eology, anthropology, among others, are also advocating a values centered approach 6 For example Clay Mathers, Timothy Darvill, and Barbara J. Little wrote about the value of archaeology and how some voices have not been heard because that was not the id ea of what was significant at that time 7 Methodologies and methods need to be developed that engage a wider range of stakeholders in identifying a broader array of values associated with heritage. More stakeholders need to be involved in determining th e values and significance of a cultural resource In addition to h istoric and aesthetic, other criteria, such as economic and use, should also be considered. Also, expanding the range of stakeholders engaged in determining significance helps prevent bias in, among others things, interpretation 8 The benefits to including more stakeholders in the process are exponential and are not limited to this list: Conducting m ore in depth histories of the site and the people involved with it Understanding the entire site Insuring that all the values associated with the site are captured L earning about all the perspectives of the history and events; not just from one or two people Discovering the social aspect not just the basic history Within this thesis there are c hallenge s that emerge in the develop ment of a theory for guiding a more inclusive way to assess heritage values these issues include enhancing stakeholder involvement, retaining sense of place, exploring all heritage values, and ensuring ongoing authentici ty. These challenges should be addressed when assess ing a historic site for its significance. The Getty Conservation Institute has
14 publish ed numerous studies about the importance of assessing heritage values within the preservation field. One thesis fro m the University of Florida 9 examined how community members valued two mid century modern structure s in Sarasota, Florida These studies all focus on the values portion of a ssessing a historic structure. This thesis hopes to add to this growing body of knowledge. 10 the community in both the valuation and the decision making processes. However, the process he used was a type of system that was specific to that community and would be difficult to reproduce in a different community. This thesis focus ed on a single case study, the Government House in St. Augustine, Florida. The Government House was chosen because the University of Florida had recently acquired stewardship of the s tructure and it requires a substantial amount of repairs from deferred maintenance in addition, the university needs to determine what the structure should be u sed for after the restoration i s complete. With this being said, representatives from the univ ersity engag ed the Interior Design D epartment to conduct a study involving the stakeholders to determine the best use for the structure and complete designs de monstrating how to incorporate those uses. The study use d qualitative methodologies including i nterview s and questionnaires to connect with a broad ran ge of stakeholders in order to assess how they value the Government House and what they believe is the best use of this historic structu re. This approach could be used to help determine all the value s associated with a site that is being assessed. Involving stakeholders and interviewing them could yield imperative information that may not have been available through traditional resource methods.
15 Hopefully, t his study adds to the growing literature o n using social science methods to assess heritage values. By involving as many stakeholders as possible in the valuation process, perhaps a fuller understanding of the potential meanings of a heritage site can be further explored and further understood Frits Pannekoek 11 also says that preservation professionals should assist and advise but not direct the process. Preservationist need to understand that they are experts on the National Register for Historic Places, experienced in the process, and experts about historic buildings but they are not experts on a particular community. They become experts on the community once they involve the stakeholders and hear all sides of the story. Th e goal is to expand the way the preservation field assigns significanc e to a heritage site This approach could augment or help inform the fifty plus year old system that is used now Many underrepresented cultures and societies may now have a chance to tell their story. Purpose Statement The purpose of this study is to u se social science research methods and tools including interviews and questionnaires to engage a wide array of stakeholders in helping determine the heritage values and best use of a specific historic structure, the Government House in Saint Augustine, Flo rida. Comparing and contrasting the results between the separate stakeholder groups will help highlight areas of agreement and conflict. A qualitative approach was determined to be the most appropriate way to the site. Also, with a more inclusive qualitative approach the results may effect a positive change, by determining the best use of the structure.
16 This study invol ved a variety of stakeholders ranging from experts from the University of Florida and St. Augustine to residents and visitors The experts were administered a semi structured interview while the non experts (residents and visitors) were administered short questionnaires. Phase one involved interviewing key stakeholders from the University of Florida and the city of St. Augustine which are key decision makers in respect to the Government House, stewardship of the building, or they were extremely familiar with the building and its history and physical condition The second phase of this study focused on short questionnaires with residents or visitors from St. Augustine, F lorida. The questionnaires were conducted in front of the Government House with people walking near the structure. The purpose of this phase is to reach out to a broad range of stakeholders involved with the Government House. The intention is to determi ne how this stakeholder group values the historic structure and what they think the best use of the building would be. A working definition for stakeholder within the community of St. Augustine would be any one that lives in the area either part time or full time or they are a visitor It is understood that there will be people who are not from the area that are participants. If they are familiar with the Government House, their questionnaires were considered important to this study. The working defini tion for socio cultural values, in this case, is any meaning they feel for the historical, social, symbolic, or aesthetic aspects of the Government House. disagree when it c omes to what value is most significant and the use of the Government
17 House. During the interviews for each group they were asked which socio cultural value (historical, symbolic, social or aesthetics) is most significant and the best use for the Governmen t House. This study focuses on analyz of a historical site or landscape with no prior knowledge of either the pro perty and with limited intervention with the community This becomes a problem because some aspects of a story may be left out. This study concentrates on the Government House in St. Augustine, Florida as a research site. The Government House was chosen because of access (it is in close proximity of the University of Florida) and the abundance of stakeholders involved. This study should be able to be reproduced and generalized to any historic site or landscape. This thesis will strive to answer questions such as: Is there a way to develop a more inclusive approach to assessing cultural heritage values? What are the benefits of agree on the significance a nd best use of the Government House? How opinion s align or misalign? The semi structured inte rviews and questionnaires were revealing The key stakeholders from St. Augustine all agreed that the cultural/symb olic value was the most significant value associated with the Government House. The key stakeholders from the University of Florida were divided. Five of the eight agreed with the St. Augustine stakeholders in that the cultural/symbolic value was most si gnificant. The other three
18 thought the historic value was the most significant. The majority of the residents/visitors For the most part all of the key stakeholders and the residents/visitors agreed that the Government House should continue to be available to the community for social events. The residents/visitors did not think the Government House was significant because of its social value but all of them wanted it to be u sed for social events. Maybe they valued it for the social aspect but did not know they did. 1 Forum Journal (Spring 2010): 12 14. and Choices in Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage ( Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute: 2002). 2 Forum Journal (Spring 2010): 12 14. 3 Preservation of What, for Whom? ed. Michael Tomlan (Ithaca: The National Council for Preservation Education, 1998). 4 Criteria for E http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm 5 http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/publications/bulletins/brochure/#evaluating 6 Clay Mathers, Timothy Darvill, and Barbara J. Little, in a world context, Heritage of Value, Archaeology of Renow n ed. Clay Mathers, Timothy Darvill, and Barbara J. Little (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2005), 1 18. 7 Ibid. 8 Preser vation of What, for Whom? ed. Michael Tomlan (Ithaca: The National Council for Preservation Education: 1998). 9 Century Modern Resources: An Examination of Public Perceptions of the Sarasota School o from the University of Florida, 2011. 10 Places 2, No.3 (Winter 1985): 10 22. 11 Criteria http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm
19 CHAPTER 2 ASSESSING CULTURAL H ERITAGE VALUES : A LITERATURE REVIEW Identifying and assessing values, also commonly referred to as significance, is a crucial first step in preserving, interpreting, and stewarding heritage sites 1 An understanding of values helps guide and inform every decision As described by Vince ce. It is not a set of rules that we follow but a process that ensures that changes happens in 2 A report conducted by the Getty Institute describe a limited body of knowledge regar ding how conservation functions in society and specifically regarding how cultural significance might best be assessed and reassessed as part of a public and enduring conservation process. Cultural significance for the purposes of conservation decision ma king can no longer be a purely scholarly construction but rather, an issue negotiated among many professionals, academics, and community members who value the object or place 3 Traditionally, professionals within the field of preservation or heritage conservation have been the expert when determining the significance of a historic resource. These professionals are trained and educated to research and document resources and make educated decisions in determining whether a resou rce is significant or not. However, t he public preserves places because they want to have a tangible link to a memory, an event, or national pride. This chapter will explore and discuss the valuation process on both national and international levels in or der to understand how historic resources are traditionally and currently evaluated. Additionally, this chapter will examine the literature on more inclusive approaches in the valuation process.
20 United States The first legislation enacted to save cult ural heritage here in the United States started with the Antiquities Act of 1906 4 i This act helped protect historic or prehistoric materials of antiquity on federally owned or tribal properties. In the late nineteenth century and early twentieth it was becoming apparent that antiquity thieves were blundering culturally and historically significant sites and sell ing items that were found. This Act is important because it was the first official action by the United States federal government to save histor ically significant resources for future generations. Three months after the Act was initiated, President Theodore Roosevelt named Devils Tower a national monument for protection 5 Ten years (1916) after the Antiquities Act was established, the Nationa l Park Service was developed. The National Park Service was developed to manage and maintain the federally owned properties that were being protected and preserved by the Department of the Interior 6 Just three years later, the Historic Sites Act gave the National Park Service authority to enforce a national policy preserving historic and archaeological sites, buildings, a nd objects for the greater good 7 With this Act, America was starting to realize these significant sites need ed to be protected and pres erved as The Historic Sites Act specifically was established to give the public to have access to historically significant sites. The 1960s, in the United States, was a controver sial time. There were many social and political concerns that challenged and changed the nation. One enduring i The Antiquities Act of 1906 was established in part because people were plundering archaeo logical sites and selling items.
21 issue was urban renewal. U rban renewal began after World War II when many people started to move out of city centers and downtown areas into ne wly established suburbs. Many urban centers deteriorated becoming what 8 In response, city managers and mayors in some instances supported by the Federal Government, initiated large scale projects to remove and replace the areas deemed blighted. During this time, America had new technologies that stemmed from the war and an abundance of money and resources. Instead of renovating the downtowns and city centers they decided that new was better and tore down the dilapidat ed cores of many major cities and small cities. This sparked an outcry from people who valued and appreciated the historic fabric and the essence of the downtowns and city centers such as Jane Jacobs Citizens were watching as childhood memories and home s were being demolished to make room for parking lots. The book, With Heritage So Rich 9 was written to help encourage the federal government to stop the destruction of the historic city from urban renewal. The recommendations from this book of essays w ere essentially written into law and became the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA). The NHPA made huge headways for preservation in the United States. It established the National Register of Historic Places and the Advisory Council on Hist oric Preservation as well as many state and local preservation agencies ii 10 The NHPA was established because the public values their heritage for its architectural, educational, historical, and economical value During this time, the United States was sti ll in the mindset that a site is only important if it is considered an outstanding piece of architecture, a thousand years old, or if ii It cannot be expressed enough how imperative the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 was to the
22 someone such as George Washington slept there. There is no vocabulary in these Acts that mentions community significance or involving other disciplines into the valuation process. With the National Historic Preservation Act came the National Register of important historical resources in or der to get a better understanding of our heritage. International One of t he first international attempts to codify a global approach to cultural heritage conservation was in 1931 when the Athens Charter was adopted to protect and conserve historic monuments 11 The Athens Charter was a n attempt to define universal principles of cultural heritage conservation. The term monument in this context is used as a historic site as well as significant physical memorials. At this point in the early 1900s conservation efforts were focused largely on physical attributes such as architectural and aesthetic significance. During World War II, thirty seven countries, including the Uni ted States, came together and created the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The initial purpose of UNESCO was to keep peace and help re establish education systems after the war 12 It has evolved to be an internati onal organization that has many facets that include education, poverty, and world heritage iii Just two years prior (1964) to the U.S. National Historic Preservation Act the Venice Charter was developed. The Venice Charter is an international framework de signed to help citizens conserve and restore their cultural heritage for social use 13 In iii UNESCO is an extremely diverse organization and is involved in an enormous amou nt of projects and causes that are beyond the scope of this paper please see their website for more information: www.unesco.org/
23 retrospect, it seems that during this time the world was really starting to realize that valuing cultural heritage is an essential part of citizenry. However, m ost o f these acts and legislations focus on fabric based conservation. There was not much discussion of other values such as cultural or social values associated with the historic sites except for the historical or the aesthetic values. It may be that it was easier for people to understand the tangible aspect of cultural heritage conservation iv because preservation was a fairly new topic. This changed w ith the Burra Charter in 1979. The Burra Charter was a conservation framework similar to the other charters e 14 This idea of conserving intangible heritage instead of just buildings was a new approach in 1979. This charter also discusses how the evolution of a structure is signific ant because all stages are a part of its history. This charter opened new directions of inquiry about heritage and its conservation and promotes a more holistic approach The most recent international regulation efforts to expand the concept and approach to heritage conservation occurred in 1994. The Nara Document on Authenticity proposes a values centered set of guidelines and maintains that it is impossible to assess historic sites on fixed criteria because the values and meanings change from culture t o culture. The Nara Document eludes that authenticity is conjectural, that if the culture deems it authentic, who is to argue 15 The United States has yet to develop anything that emulates the Burra Charter or in fact the Nara Document. iv In this context, cultural heritage conservation and historic preservation are synonymous and will be used interchangeably.
24 Existing Approac hes to Assessing Values In the United States, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 established the National Register of Historic Places. The National Register is an honorific program that seeks to identify historic properties to preserve in the United States. A range of different types of historic resources can be listed on the register such as archaeological sites, bridges, landscapes, and engineering structures among other types of resources In order to be listed on the National Register, si tes have to meet one of four criteria that help describe why the place is significant and worthy of preservation. The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and: A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. That are associated with the lives of significant persons in or past; or C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that re present a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory 16 At the national level in the United States, anyone can nominate a historic site to the National Register of Historic Places. However, nominations are often completed by those with training and experience in historic preservation, history, or allied disciplines. The nomination then must first be approved by th e State Historic Preservation Office 17 After it is approved at the state level it must be forwarded to the National Park Service to be reviewed and accepted by the Keeper of the National Register of Hi storic Places. The Keeper of the
25 National Register is evaluating the historic site for the criteria listed above as well as for integrity and character defining features In this case, integrity means that the structure retains many of the historic fabri c associated with its period of significance v Integrity often refers to the tangible, physical material s and values refers to the intangible aspects of the heritage resource under consideration. As previously described, the Burra Charter, maintains that each alteration is significant to the building because it is a part of the history of the site. International conservation movements have really embraced the values International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the World Conservation Union (IUCN), determining which site is eligible and significant. This is also known as the top down approach 18 However, they assess the value of their historic sites with a broader list of criterion that includ es natural aspects and cultural landscapes. The criteria are limiting. They have not changed since the inception of the National Historic Preservation Act in 1966. This was more than fifty years ago, the field of preservation is always changing but the p rocess of assessing our herit age has not. Another reason the s e criteria are l imiting is that it is more fabric based instead of values center ed 19 From reading the criteria, they are broad but purposefully do not describe all the values associated with a heritage site. There are many values that a person can hold for a site such as the social cultural, economic, and symbolic importance. At the state level, states are allowed to set tax incentives for preserving or renovating historic structures such as an ad valorem tax credit. The local governments v Period of significance indicates what time frame the structure was deemed important, usually when it was constructed or when the famous person slept there.
26 are tasked with the job of developing ordinances and guidelines for historic districts and local nomination processes. In most cases, local governments align their policy with the National Register criteria This allows local governments legal justification because they have patterned themselves with generally recognized professional standards. Such is the case in Metropolitan Dade County v. Birds No. 93 1578 20 ; the county patterned their ordinances on the federal historic preservation regulations and drew the term that the county did not define the term. Since the local government adopted that term from the federal his toric preservation regulations they were not required to define the term and were able to have the power to determine the property in question significant 21 Internationally, values are assessed a little differently than in the United States. The most com mon way to assess cultural heritage values is by using the World 22 The s e criteria state that a site must have and meet at least one out of ten selection criteria The World Heritage C enter criteria are comprised of six cultural determinates and four natural determinates. The natural determinates are one aspect that the United States has yet to adopt and is another reason why the National Register criteria is limiting. Such terms such as cultural landscapes vi are not mentioned at all in the National Register for Historic Places. This term is fairly well known in the preservation fie ld but yet the leading framework for assessing our cultural heritage has yet to recognize it. vi Cultural landscapes are defined by the World Heritage Convention as combined works of nature and humankind. See http://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/477/ for more information.
27 The process of listing a site on the World Heritage List (WHL) is just as detailed and stringent as the U.S. National Register. In order for a country to nominate a site to the WHL it must have previously signed the World Heritage Convention. The first step in the nomination process is for the State Party to develop a tentative list approved by the WHL committee This list is an inventory of significant sites within their area. The second step is to develop a nomination file which includes an exhaustive amount of research on each site on the tentative list. After the World Heritage Center receives the nomination file it is transferred to the three separate Advisory Bodies. These three Advisory Bodies evaluate the nomination file. After the Advisory Bodies review the file, the World Heritage Committee makes the final decision if it will be added to the list. The committee meets once a year to makes the decision 23 New Approaches to Assessing Values Preservationists and others are increasingly expanding the way in which heritage sites are assessed and values are assigned. The top down approach is giving way to a more holistic approach that attempts to engage stakeholders in helping determine significance. Preservationists are not the only ones that think th e evaluation of significance process should be more values based. The Society for American Archaeology published an article in 1983 about how the meanings assigned to a site change over time and the criteria the United S tates uses to assess values do not reflect this 24 Randy Hester is landscape architect by trade but also teaches sociology at Berkeley. He wrote a pivotal article in 1985, Subconscious Landscapes of the Heart. The article discusses how Manteo, North Carolina was in danger of becoming a fo rgotten small town. Hester
28 spent two days there and realized that the town needed more than a face lift, it needed community re development. H e worked with the community members (using a unique map ping technique) to determine what parts of the town were significant and had to be preserved and what could be re developed for economic benefits. He found that most all the significant sites in Manteo were not significant in a traditional sense. They would have most likely been neglected by a trained professional following the traditional method and guidelines for evaluating historic resources This point is relevant If Hester had not involved the community in the valuation process, it may have ended differently. Th e ordinary sites were actually largely significant to residents and helped define who they were as a community 25 Preservationists bega n considering this value based concept in the late 1990s. Preservation professionals began exploring new approaches to assessing values The conference and book, Preservation of what, for whom? is a great example of this concept. Held in 1997 at Gouche r College, t he conference was sponsored by the National Park Service, Goucher College, and the National Council for Preservation Education. These experts were essentially trying to say that they are not the experts within the community. They should be bro ught in to help and assist with the valuation process, not direct it. Frits Pannekoek (a contributor in Preservation of what, for whom ) describes this approach significance of a commun and professional bureaucracies. In the process, a community has been alienated from 26
29 There are also international mo vements toward realign ing from the fabric based to the values based such as the previously mentioned, the Burra Charter. Within the charter, it pronounces that in order to conserve cultural heritage, recognizing the values that are associated with all cul tural groups should be a priority. The charter also states that when assessing the significance of a site the cultural groups should be involved in the decision making 27 Randall Mason has worked with the Getty Conservation Institute on projects involvin g values of cultural heritage such as Values and Heritage Conservation (2000) and Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage (2002). These studies and reports aim at defining heritage values and advocating that preservation professionals start concentratin g on all the values and stakeholders associated with a historic site. These reports were among the first to examine and challenge traditional methods for determining values associated with heritage and to explore new ones. After the 2002 research report from the Getty Institute, there have been a number of journal articles and book chapter s advocating this approach to valuation Randall Mason wrote an article, Fixing Historic Preservation: A Constructive in 2004. Mason argues that onceptually, the heart of historic preservation lies in the intellectual and emotional conn ections we make between memory and the environment 28 Preservationist may have forgott en along the way that saving heritage i s more than saving old buildings, about identifying, documenting, and preserving Clay Mathers, Timothy Darvill, and Barbara J. Little quote Mary Hufford in their Introduction section of Heritage of Value, Archaeolo gy of Renown The se scholars
30 believe that there should be a shift from the typical top down approach (within the 29 The Burra Charter was developed i n Australia to help protect the indigenous about the values associated with historical resources. One man in particular, Dirk H.R. Spennemann has written quite a f ew articles about involving the community into the valuation process. In one article, Gauging Community Values in Historic Preservation regards to determining the significance of a site) 30 If this is true, how can a preservation professional chose one of the four limited criterion from the National Register? How can every stakeholder associated with that site agree on one of those four? Jeremy Wells, a preservatio n professional, recently (Spring 2010) wrote an article in the Forum Journal published by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Authenticity in More than One Dimension: Reevaluating a Core Premise of Historic Preservation is a short article that d iscusses how preservation professionals should use social science methodologies to collect meanings from a population. He also says there is a need for a framework for professional to use these methods in their valuation processes. The National Trust fo r Historic Preservation (National Trust) is a non profit organization who stewards historic properties as well as advocates for preservation within the United States. In light of the new research about involving community
31 members in the valuation process and moving from fabric based conservation, the Nation Trust designed a photo contest. The photo contest, This Place Matters, i s a project that helped communities highlight a cultural resource that is significant to them. Communities get together, choose a site that is significant to their town or area, and they take a picture of it (usually with people standing in front of it with signs that say, website and any one ca n vote on their favorite picture. The winner is awarded $25,000 31 to use for preservation within their community. This program attempts to involve more stakeholders when assessing the values of a historic site as well as understand what is truly important to a community Overall, preservation has come a long way in the United States since the Antiquities Act of 1906 and internationally since the Athens Charter in 1931 There has been a noticeable shift from professionals focusing on the materials of a h istoric site to the current approach of focusing on the values and meanings of a site. The United international way of thinking. This shift can start with augmenting the existing National Register of Historic Places to reflect a more values centered approach instead of fabric based and authenticity based. 1 National Register of Historic Places Fundamentals: How to List http://www.nps.gov/nr/national_register_fundamentals.htm 2 Forum Journal 2010. 3 Erica Avrami, Randall Mason, and Marta de la Torre, Values and Heritage Conservation. Research report, Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute, 2000. 4 National Park Service, Na tional Park Service History: Antiquities Act of 1906. November 24, 2004. http://www.nps.gov/history/history/hisnps/npshistory/antiq.htm.
32 5 National Park Service History: Antiquities Act of 1906 National Park Service, http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/hisnps/npshistory/monuments.htm 6 National Park Serivce: A Brief History." National Park Service History. 1999. http://www.nps.gov/history/history/hisnps/NPSHistory/npshisto.htm. 7 National Park Service. Historic Sites Act of 1935. 1935. http://www.nps.gov/history/locallaw/FHPL_HistSites.pdf 8 New Rochelle Studio http://www.columbia.edu/itc/architecture/bass/newrochelle/extra/emin_dom.html 9 Albert Rains and Laurence Henderson, With Heritage So Rich. Accumulation of Essays, New York: Random House, 1966. 10 Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The National Historic Preservation Program: Overview April 02, 2002. http://www.achp.gov/overview.html 11 International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation. "The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments," First International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic Monuments. Athens: ICOMOS, 1931. 12 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. The Organization's History. 2011. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/about us/who we are/history/. 13 ICOMOS. International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites The Venice Charter. Charter, Venice: ICOMOS, 1964. 14 Australia ICOMOS Incorporated. The Burra Charter: the Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance. Charter, Burwo od, Australia: Australia ICOMOS Incorporated, 2000. 15 ICOMOS, UNESCO, and ICCROM. "The Nara Document on Authenticity." Nara Conference on Authenticity. Nara, Japan: ICOMOS, 1994. 16 National Park Service, Section II: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm 17 National Park Service, National Register of Historic Places Fundamentals: How to List a Property in the National Register. June 12, 2011. http://www.nps.gov/nr/national_register_fundamentals.htm 18 World Heritage List Nominations. http://whc.unesco.org/en/nominations /. 19 Jeremy C. Wells, "Authenticity in More than One Dimension: Reevaluating a Core Premise of Historic Preservation," Forum Journal 2010: 37 41. 20 Metropolitan Dade County, Petitioner, v. P.J. Birds, Inc., Respondent. No. 93 1578 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, April 12, 1995). 21 Ibid. 22 UNESCO. World Heritage Convention: The Criteria for Selection. 2011. htt p://whc.unesco.org/en/criteria/. 23 http://whc.unesco.org/en/nominations/. 24 Joseph A. Tainer and John Lucas. "Epistemology of the Significance Concept."
33 Society for American Archaeology 1983: 707 719. 25 Randy Hester, "Subconscious Landscapes of the Heart." Places Vol.2 No.3: 10 22 26 Frits Pannekoek, "The Rise of a Heritage Priesthood." In Preservation of What, for Whom? by Michael, ed. Tomlan. Ithaca: The National Council for Preservation Education, 1998. 27 Australia ICOMOS Incorporated. The Burra Charter: the Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance. Charter, Burwood, Australia: Australia ICOMOS Incorporated, 2000. 28 Randall Mason. "Fixing Historic Preservation: A Constructive Critique of "Significance"." Places 2004: 64 71. 29 Clay Mathers, Timothy Darvill, and Barbara J. Little. "Introduction." In Heritage of Value, Archaeology of Renown by Clay Mathers, Timothy Darvill and Barbara J. Little, 10 11. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2005. 30 Dirk H.R. Spennemann, "Gauging Community Values in Historic Preservation." CRM Journal 2006: 6 20. 31 National Trust for Historic Preservat ion. 2011 This Place Matters Community Challenge. 2011. http://www.preservationnation.org/take action/this place matters/community challenge/.
34 CHAPTER 3 THE GOVERNMENT HOUSE, ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA Originally erected in 1713, the Government House underwent many changes before it was reconstructed in 1936. T he Government House is one of St. Augustine, known buildings. The Government House, originally known as the Palace of the Governors, is prominently loca ted adjacent to the colonial era plaza where many community activities have and continue to take place. There has been a civic structure and government presence on its site since the late 1500s. It has and still is the place of many significant events an d social gathering throughout its approximate four hundred years of existence. In order to convey the significance of the Government House, it is necessary to describe the context in which th e structure has evolved. This chapter will discuss a brief hist ory of the City of St. Augustine as well as an evolution of the history of the Government House. Establishment of St. Augustine Pedro Menndez de Aviles established S t Augustine for the Spanish in 1565 For nearly one year, Pedro and his crew used a large Native American structure as their headquarters. This structure and the original St. Augustine settlement site were destroyed by fire on April 19, 1566. It is thought that the nearby Timucua tribe may have been responsible for the devastation of th e first settlement. In response to the fire, the Spanish moved east to Anastasia Island where they built additional forts and a town. However, this second settlement was abandoned in 1572, when it was decided that it was too vulnerable. The Spanish move d back to St. Augustine 1 A typical Spanish Colonial settler or soldier was given one lot to construct a residence, while wealthier or politically connected colonists were assigned four lots.
35 The width of a Spanish house lot in the sixteenth century was f orty four feet east to west. The Spanish had a social hierarchy that was adopted from their homeland. A man born in Spain was held at the highest regard, under him was a man of Spanish descent but born in the New World, and last were citizens of mixed ra ces. The true Spanish settler had a choice of lots closest to the town center. The early settlers made use of what was available to them to build their homes. Initially, the Spanish built their structures with pine logs and thatched roofs 2 The long le af pine was plentiful in Florida during this time. In the late 1600s the Spanish were tired of having to reconstruct their wooden structures because of fires and natural disasters. A quarry was established to rebuild the fort and after that, the Spanish started using the local coquina for their buildings 3 The Spanish believed in separation of public and private spaces. They built their structures to abut the narrow street line for shade and to shelter the private areas. The streets were narrow in ord er to benefit from the shade of the buildings. The Spanish also had walled their courtyards for privacy. The courtyards were used for laundry, livestock, and gardens. The typical lot contained a kitchen building and a building for sleep ing 4 Below is a map of St. Augustine that was drawn by Hernando de Mestas in 1593 and depicts the center of the original town plan. This map shows in detail what the Spanish thought were the main aspects of the town plaza The structures encircled in red are a few of t he buildings that were especially important during those times. They are the Parish, the Guard House, and the Government House. These buildings were a the early 1500s.
36 Figure 3 1 A photo of a m ap of St. Augustine in 1593 Law of the Indies By 1598, the then Governor of St. Augustine, Gonzalo Mendez de Canzo, moved from the Government House shown in the previous map to another wooden structure a little farther west away from the wharf, where the current Government House is located. The structure was owned by a widow named Doa Maria de Pomar and finally purchased by the Crown in 1604. There has a government presence in this location since Governor Gonzalo moved it in 1598 5 Govern or Gonzalo Mendez de Canzo also redesigned the plaza in accordance with the Leyes de las Indias Law of the Indies. The Law of the Indies were written and compiled in 1572 by the King of Spain, Phillip II 6 The Law of the Indies were codes and regulations to help with the establishment of towns in the New World 7 The plaza was designed to be the center
37 8 People of the town would congregate around the pl aza as they still do today. According to the codes, the plaza should be placed at the port and the four 9 The town was also to be built in such a way that there was room for expansion. The cathedral was to b e built in a position on the plaza so that when leaving by the sea it is able to be seen. Also, the custom house and arsenal should be built in close proximity to the cathedral, in the case they need to aid each other 10 T he Spanish believed that there sh ould be a fort to protect the cities in proximity to the sea. At the entrance of the harbor in St. Augustine, there has been a fortification since the first settlement. The first forts were made of wood until the technology and resources were available t o rebuild it out of local coquina stone. Coquina is a type of masonry that is found naturally in the St. Augustine area. The historic city of St. Augustine still reflects these codes and regulations after more than four hundred years. St. Augustine is cu nation's oldest permanently occupied European settlement 11 It is thought of that because the Timucan Indians were in the area before the Spanish. The Spanish occupied St. Augustine from 1565 to 1763. In 1763 the British captured the City and a ruled until the Spanish took it over again in 1784. The second Spanish ruling lasted until Florida became a s tate in 1821 12 The Government House There are man y layers of history within the C ity of St. Augustine and the Government House T he present day Government House, located at 48 King Street in St. Augustine, Florida is still located on the original 1598 plaza. The original wooden
38 wood again, the Span iards, with help from local Native Americans, built the ground floor de San Marcos on Anastasia Island beginning in 1672 The second story was constructed of stone in 1 713 following the destruction of the original, wooden one during a raid in 1702. It was finished on the same day of the Governor Francisco de Corcoles version of the columns with capitals supported a second story gallery above the loggia bordering the main patio. The patio was south of the house, enclosed by a two story wall on St. 13 couple patios for laundry, latrines, and stables 14 Following the transfer of St. Augustine from the Spanish to the English, the luding its owner. In 1763, James Grant became the governor of East Florida. He had the large openings of the built on the site in 1765. During this the residence consis ted of: a library, dining room, guest rooms, and a parlor for the men. This building was also used for hosting parties and events as it was an enormous and extravagantly designed structure 15
39 Figure 3 2. Painting of the Governor's House in the 1760s damage. It is said that the repairs may not have been of quality because in 1819 a visitor wrote that it was in disrepair and it was obvious that no one was taking care of the rathe r large structure 16 Florida became a U.S. Territory in 1821, which is the same year that the a courthouse and a post office. For a brief time in 1823 it became the Capitol of the new Territory of Florida 17 It is believed when the structure became a courthouse that The architect, Robert Mills, who designed the Washington Monu ment, came to St. Augustine in 1833, to redesign the Government House. Robert Mills (1781 1855) is known as one of the first American trained architect. He worked for Mr. James Hoban
40 and Benjamin Henry Latrobe both architects for the United State Capito l. He was friends with Thomas Jefferson and is reported to have been hired by Jefferson to make drawings of his completed plans for Monticello 18 Mills is known for designing public buildings in the Neoclassical S tyle. In the picture below y ou may be abl e to notice a few neoclassical details such as the many columns on the faade. used th e pre existing structural walls 19 However, he did remove the large tower, the balcony, and the two story wall that r an along St. George Street. Mills designed the renovation while he was in Washington D.C.; he did not come to St. Augustine first. He was not aware of Spanish designs, culture or architecture 20 Therefore he designed the renovation based on Greek Revival S tyle that was popular in American at the time. Figure 3 3. Governmen t House after the Robert Mills r enovation (1864 ). Between 1834 when Robert Mills renovated the Government House and 1936 there is not much information about the use of the building or just the building. It is known that the structure was used as a courthouse and post office until 1891. The use of the co urthouse ceased in 1891 but it is said that it continued to be used as a post
41 office 21 There are a few post cards that show the Government House as a post office (see below). However, the photos are less than twenty years apart and have notable differenc es especially in the roof elevations. There were obviously changes to the Figure 3 4. Government House used as a post o ffice (dated 1906).
42 Figure 3 5 Postcard of the Government House (dated 1922). The existing Government House dates to a 1930s reconstruction that was undertaken as part of the Works Progress Administration (WPA). To help address the Great Depression that followed the 1929 stock market crash, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt establish ed the New Deal program which enacted the WPA. WPA among other activities employ ed out of work architects, builders, engineers, and laborers to help the economy and put to work many people that suffered from the decline of the housing market These prof essional and workers were tasked with renovating and constructing new federal buildings throughout the United States 22 The lead architects for the Government House reconstruction were Mellen Clark Greely and Clyde Harris 23 The Government House was redesi gned to reflect its Spanish origins. The building was erected using a mix of modern materials and technologies, such as steel framing, and traditional materials, such as the coquina and stucco faade. The balcony facing St. as well as the stone wall around the courtyard. The
43 interiors were substantially altered to house the United States Post Office. However, for significant business matters The interior first floors were composed of terrazzo and the staircase to the second floor is made of beautiful stone with iron balustrades. Figure 3 6 Current G overnment House after the 1936 WPA r econstruction In 1965, the post office was removed from the Government H ouse One year after the post office left the Government House, the Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board moved in. Government House until 2007. During this period, a number of changes and alterations were made to the Government House primarily its interiors A small museum was added to the first floor in order to showcase the historical and cultural items that the Archaeologist had unearthed in the area. Public bathrooms were also i nstalled in the main lobby area for the many visitors. The second floor was divided up into offices for the Preservation Board to use for their daily business.
44 Preserving St. Augustine There is a long tradition of grass root preservation in St. Augustine, which helps account for its appearance today. Local officials began to focus on the preservation of the City prior to the National Historic Preservation Act in 1966. As early as 1832, the residents of St. Augustine request ed for funds from the U.S. Cong ress to help preserve the Castillo de San Marcos fort 24 the City through research and documentation and physical work on historic properties. The first site that was purchased, preserved, and converted to a house museum by the St. Augustine Historic Society was the Gonzalez Alvarez House in 1918 25 In 1924, the management of t he Castillo de San Marcos fort was transferred to the National Park Service from the War Department. The National Park Service preserves the historic fort in accordance with the Secretary of Interior Standards 26 Henry Flagler, co founder of the Standard Oil Company, came to St. Augustine in the late 1880s and was an integral part of the town becoming a resort destination 27 He built two hotels adjacent to one another across King Street. The more luxurious Ponce de Leon Hotel currently houses Flagler Col residents, was adapted to house Flagler College in 1963 28 The State of Florida granted St. Augustine the power of eminent domain in 1937 to protect the historical resources within the historic city. In 1959 the St. Augustine Historical Restoration and Preservation Commis sion was established through Florida Legislat ion ( currently called Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board). Their mission was to help preserve, reconstruct, and restore the historic city for educ ation and the
45 public. In 1963 the Spanish Quarter was opened as a 1700s living museum to educate the public about life during that time. In 1970 the walled portion of the historic city was listed on the National Register of Historic Places 29 In 1980, the City Commission adopted a comprehensive plan for the historic city that promotes preservation and development regulations. With the adoption of the comprehensive plan, it seems the c period to mana ging their resources 30 which was mostly a reconstruction, was mainly focused on St. George Street because it was becoming dilapidated 31 The S tate of Florida eliminated the Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board in 1997. The museums, maintenance, and management of historic properties that the preservation board was responsible for were transferred to the City of St. Augustine 32 Be tween 1961 and 1984, the Commission (renamed the Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board in 1968) restored, reconstructed or preserved some forty buildings within the colonial city, most of them in the blocks bounded by Fort Alley and Hypolita streets on the north and south, and between St. George and Charlotte streets. The City of St. Augustine contributed to the program's interpretive effort by limiting St. George Street to pedestrian traffic from the City Gate to Hypolita Street. 33 Government House and St. Augustine Today Currently, the Government House contains an historic museum on the first floor (since 1991). The museum contains archaeological artifacts from the historic city as well as exhibits showcasing a variety of historic objects 34 Weddings and social events floor are used every year for the Light the Nights in November and other special events
46 with dignitaries. The King of Spain visited St. Augustine and spoke from the recreated balcony for the entire historic city. Chapter 267.1735 Florida Statute (F.S.) of the Florida State Legislature was enacted in 2007. This legislature states that the University of Florida would be awarded stewardshi p over 34 buildings within the C ity of St. Augus C ity of St. Augustine originally was charged with stewardship of these historic structures prior to the legislation 35 Along with this legislation, the responsibility for maintaining and protecting these structures was issued to the University of Florida. The Facilities and Planning Department conducted a report in July 2007 of the deferred maintenance, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance, and physical assessment of all structures under their stewardship 36 One of the structures included in the 2007 report was the Government House O f the 34 buildings that the University of Florida manages t he Government House is the largest with over 25,000 square feet. The 2007 report concluded that the Government House has many issues ranging from routine maintenance to major repairs The repair and rehabilitation totals were estimated well over $16 million dollars A strategic plan was developed in 2009 to align the goals of the Uni versity of Florida and the C ity of St. Augustine. Another purpose of the 2009 strategic plan was to help define how the Florida w ould maintain, manage, and use the 34 properties listed in the 2007 Legislative statue. During the development of the 2009 stra tegic plan a Strategic Plan Steering Committee was established to involve the community of St. Augustine to discuss recommendations for the actual strategic plan. The Steering Committee included representatives from the University of Florida, St. Augusti ne Visitor
4 7 and Convention Bureau, Flagler College, National P ark Service, and of course the C ity of St. Augustine 37 A Direct Support Organization (DSO) formed as a result of the 2007 Legislativ e statue Th e DSO is responsible for the physical management a nd historic preservation education of the allotted properties in St. Augustine. The responsib i l iti e s of the DSO include overseeing the daily maintenance issues supervision of all aspects of the commercial retail tenants and for the management of the UF Histo ric St. Augustine Inc. 38 After the transition of the properties to the University of Florida, many buildings will need to undergo rehabilitation to manage the deferred maintenance issues and some may need to be programmed with different uses The Gove rnment House, being the largest of all the buildings acquired, will need the most work. Typically, a rehabilitation of this size is very in depth and lengthy. This is the perfect time to evaluate the structure and to engage stakeholders to determine the values associated with it as well as the best use of the building. In order to effectively rehabilitate this structure to its best use, it must be determined what the stakeholders believe is significant about the structure and what they think the best way to use it is. Many building undergo rehabilitation without investigating the significance and best use and they are not utilized to the best of their ability because they were rehabilitated for a use that is not consistent with stakehold er needs This t hesis aims to investigate stakeholder views of the significance of the Government House as a first step in informing its rehabilitation and adaptive use
48 1 Elsbeth K. Gordon, (Gainesville, Florida: University Press of Florida, 2002), 56 66. 2 Gordon, 58. 3 Gordon, 80 81. 4 Gordon, Colonial Architectural Heritage 59 61. 5 Gordon, 62 64. 6 The Codes Project http://codesproject.asu.edu/sites/default/files/code_pdfs/Laws_of_indies.pdf. 7 I bid. 8 G ordon, 64. 9 The Codes Project http://codesproject.asu.edu/sites/default/f iles/code_pdfs/Laws_of_indies.pdf 10 I bid. 11 The St. Augustine Record, http://staugustine.com/history/government house 12 I bid. 13 Gordon, Colonial Architectural Heritage 90. 14 Gordon, 91. 15 Gordon, 93. 16 Gordon, 93 94. 17 The St. Augustine Record, http://staugustine.com/history/government house http://www.staugustine.ufl.edu/govHouse.html 18 Columbia Historic Society 40/41 (1940): 1 35. 19 http://www.staugustine.ufl.edu/govHouse.html 20 Gordon, 129 131. 21 The St. Augustine Record, http://staugustine.com/history/government house 22 Encyclopedia of the Great Depression 2 (2004): 1061 1067. 23 Gordon, eritage 88. 24 St. Augustine Historical Society, "St. Augustine Historical Society/Timeline." staugustinehistoricalsociety.org (2011), http://www.staugustinehistoricalsociety.org/time line.pdf 25 St. Augustine Government, "Historic Preservation." City of St. Augustine, http://www.staugustinegovernment.com/your_go vernment/harb arch guidelines/3%20 %20Historic%20Preservation.pdf 26 St. Augustine Government, "Historic Preservation." City of St. Augustine, http://www.staugustinegovernment.com/your_government/harb arch guidelines/3%20 %20Historic%20Preservation.pdf 27 Government House: The St. Augustine Record, http://staugustine.com/history/government house
49 28 St. Augustine Historical Society, "St. Augustine Historical Society/Timeline." staugustinehistori calsociety.org (2011), http://www.staugustinehistoricalsociety.org/timeline.pdf 29 St. Augustine Government, "Historic Preservation." City of St. Augustine, http://www.staugustinegovernment.com/your_government/harb arch guidelines/3%20 %20Historic%20Preservation.pdf 30 Preserving St. http://colonialstaugustine.org/11.html 31 I bid. 32 St. Augustine Government, "Historic Preservation." City of St. Augustine, http://www.staugustinegovernment.com/your_government/harb arch guidelines/3%20 %20Historic%20Preservation.pdf 33 http://colonialstaugustine.org/11.html 34 http://www.staugustinegovernment.co m/visitors/govhouse.cfm 35 RS&H et al. St. Augustine: Historic Area Strategic Plan. Gainesville: University of Florida, 2009. 36 I bid. 37 I bid. 38 http://www.staugustine.ufl.edu/
50 CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHODS Social Science Methodology This thesis is focused on developing a more inclusive approach to engaging stakeholders in the assessment of cultural heritage values associated with a historic site A qualitative methodology was chosen in order to obtain more in depth informatio n. Acco rding to John Creswell in his Research Design a qualitative research prises a flexible organization approach 1 A qualitative methodology is used 2 Qualitative studies use tools (research instruments) such as open ended interviews, ethnographies, and observations among others Qualitative methodologies are typically used in the social scien ce fields such as psychology and anthropology because feelings. Within the preservation field, it is difficult to define concepts such as values and significance that is one of the reasons why a qualitative approach was determined to be the best methodology to use in this study. A mixed methods approach, using qualitative and quantitative methodologies is most often used The qualitative approach produces in depth data whereas quantitative methodologies produce more measureable data. Using these two me thods together can show validity within the study. With this study qualitative research methods were used, but if it was needed a mixed method approach incorporating qu antitative tools as well could be used to strengthen the case with the data that was
51 collected. However, it can be very difficult to take a purely quantitative study and analyze the data to interpret it qualitatively. There are a number of heritage speci alists and scholars using social science or qualitative methodologies to assess cultural heritage resources. Anthropologist Setha Low 3 and Preservation expert Jeremy Wells 4 assert that qualitative methodologies are useful in determining how a heritage sit e should be assessed and maintained. Setha Low, in Anthropological Ethnographic Methods for the Assessment of Cultural Values in Heritage Conservation discusses a qualitative methodology, Rapid Ethnographic ber of methods selected to produce different types of data from diverse resources that can be triangulated to 5 behavioral mapping, many types of interviews, and observations t o assess a heritage site to determine how the stakeholders value it. These professionals are using these social science methods to involve as many stakeholders in the valuation process as possible. S ocial science methodologies help ensure the researcher r eceives in depth and rich data. For t he data collection this study was divided into two groups. The first group was the expert stakeholder group from the University of Florida and the City of St. Augustine. ses of this study) is defined as an expert within the heritage conservation field such as an archaeologist or preservation specialist with a working knowledge of the heritage site under study or they are a primary decision maker for the heritage site under study These stakeholders were chosen because they all played a role in the stewardship transfer of the St. Augustine
52 properties and they were self chosen in that they were the individuals that responded to the request. Sommer and Sommer describe se mi structured interviews as asking questions 6 Semi structured interviews were chosen because there was the opportunity to have in depth interviews and explore any unanticipated outcomes. At the end of the interview there was also an opportunity for interviewees to add any additional thoughts or ideas that w ere not covered in the interview The second non expert group who are residents or visitors of St. Augustine, FL They were asked similar but short er questions from a questionnaire at random outside of the Government House. Short questionnaires were chosen because people get fatigued and lose inte rest if the questionnaire is too long. 7 This group type was chosen because the researcher wanted to involve as many as the stakeholders as possible in the process. This group also offered an alternative viewpoint to the expert group. Expert Stakeholder Group : This study was part of a larger project to determine and test an appropriate new use for the City of St. Augustine Government House. The summer of 2010 the S tate of Florida physically assigned stewardship of over those thirty buildings to the Univ er sity of Florida from the C ity of St. Augustine, Florida. The Interior Design Department at the University of Florida was tasked to create adaptive use plans for the Government House use would be a joint research center for St. Augustine and the University of Florid a. This research
53 center would be interdisciplinary; meaning, many different colleges from the University of Florida would have access as well as Flagler College in St. Augu stine. This studio project wa s directed by Morris Hylton III and was conducted in the fall of 2010. There were two graduate student assistants; Pam ela Cotera and Blair Mullins (researcher). The studio class was composed of undergraduate Interior Design juniors. This junior level studio teaches an evidence based design solution that includes research center description, pre design research outcomes, building program, schematic ideas, and a description of model research framework with recommendations for future improvement and implementation. During the time period between September 2010 and March 2011, the previously mentioned studio class in collaboration with the C ity of St. Augustine used an Action Research 8 model to identify needs and probable uses, develop a program, and prepare exploratory designs for the adaptive use and rehabilitation of the Government House in St. Augustine using sustainable design and construction methods. The use of sustainable design and construction methods was necessary bec ause the University of Florida, in 2001, implemented a rule that any renovation or new construction must comply with Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards 9 The goal for this project was to use the information collected and assemb led during the pre design research phase to develop recommendations for the adaptive use and rehabilitation of the Government House. There were many i mp ortant aspects of the studio project such as site analysis and pre design research methods which inclu ded benchmarks, buildi ng analysis, and code compliance
54 involved in the acquisition of the properties to determine how these stakeholders valued the Government House and what they be lieved to be the best use for the structure. E xpert stakeholders were interviewed as part of this study. This was the first group to be interviewed. After the data was reviewed and analyzed then the visitor/resident group questionnaire w as developed and administered. Details and Interview Results: es or assigns significance to historic sites through the examination and analysis of archives, deed research, and histories, etc. 10 In that process a limited number of stakeholders or building users are usually involved in the process. In this study, the researcher involved a broad range of stakeholders to assess the value of the Government House to determine the best use of th e building. In the first phase of the research there were nine expert stakeholders interviewed from the University of Florida. There were eight expert sta keholders interviewed from the C ity of St. Augustine. These stakeholders were either key decision m akers or experts in the preservation of St. Augustine heritage There were two separate interview questionnaires; one for University of Florid a stakeholders and one for the C ity of St. Augustine stakeholders. The only difference between the two interv iew packets is that each one was tailored to that particular group. applicable to St. Augustine stakeholders. One question asked on the St. Augustine activities and events has the C ity of St. Augustine
55 because they do not live in the city. There were a total of seventeen expert stakeholders interviewed in this study. These interviews were held in varies places such as offices in Gainesville and St. Augustine, coffee shops, and other similar places over a number o f months in late 2010 and early 2011. In the beginning of the interview, the stakeholders were asked about their backgrounds and what experience they have in their current/former positions. After the basic questions were answered they were asked about wh at they thought of the socio cultural values of the Government House. The interview form gave them four categories they could discuss: Historical (i.e. What aspect of history does the building represent? Spanish Colonial period? WPA and 20th Century Rec onstruction ?) Cultural / Symbolic (i.e. What aspects of culture does the building symbolize, such as civic pride? Is it associated with traditional community events, such as cer emonial locking of the gates?) Social (i.e. How does the community and others local or otherwise use the building today?) Aesthetic (i.e. How would you describe the style and design of the building? Does it represent St. Augustine? Do you think the architecture contributes to the significanc e of the building?). The se four socio cultural values were chosen after a review of recent literature including Assessing Values in Conservation Planning: Methodological Issues and Choices 11 His article described values typically assigned to historic structures by an array of stakeholders Directly after that question, they were asked which socio cultural value they felt was the most significant out of the four they were presented with N ext, they were asked
56 House and St. Augustine in general. Lastly, they were asked to describe what they felt and thought the best use of the Government House should be. N on Expert Stakeholder Group : After the first phase, the researcher developed a separate, more concise questionnaire appropriate to the initial semi structured interview. In order to ask the resident and visitor group how they viewed the socio cultural val ues of the Government House (while standing near the physical structure) the questionnaire needed to be shorter and easier for people, not familiar with typical preservation terms, to understand as well as to avoid fatigue and boredom. This portion of the study was conducted in November 2011 and January 2012. The purpose of this second phase in the study was (resident and visitors) valued it as well as help determine the best u se of the structure. The reasoning comes back to the idea about changing our idea of how we assess our cultural heritage to be more inclusive and involve as many stakeholders in the decision making process as possible. The researcher chose to ask random people near the physical structure because she felt that if they were near the building they may know it, use it, and have an attachment to it. The University of Florida requires all students to go through an internal review board (IRB) process if they ar e conducting research with human subjects. The researcher was required to fill out forms describing the questionnaire, submit a copy of the questionnaire, submit any handouts the participants would be given, and develop an informed consent form for the pa rticipants. All of these forms were required for approval to conduct the random questionnaires (see Appendix G ).
57 Informed consent forms tell the participant about the study and whether or not there is any compensation involved. Normal IRB informed cons ent forms require the participants to read it, sign, and return to the researcher. In the case of this thesis, the researcher understood that most people do not feel comfortable signing their name on a form from a stranger. IRB approved the consent form without having to require the participants to sign it because there was no compensation or contact involved. This step was particularly helpful to the researcher because people were not put off by having to sign anything and were comfortable answering que stions. In addition to the questionnaire, the researcher developed a handout with quick facts about the Government House on one side in case a participant was not familiar with the structure. On the other side of the handout, the researcher developed a t ype of photo elicitation to help describe the four socio cultural values the questionnaire was focusing on. Photo elicitation is described by Douglas Harper 12 The parts of the brain that process visual information are evolutionarily older than those that process verbal information. Thus images evoke deeper elements of human consciousness than words do; exchanges in which the brain is processing images as well as words. The idea t o use photo elicitation was introduced to the researcher by a dissertation, Place Attachment, Power Mechanisms, Landscape Valuation, and Attitudes Toward Protected Area Management of Everglades National Park, Florida 13 In the dissertation the writer dis cusses the importance of photo elicitation in the research they conducted. The participants were asked to bring any photos they took of their experiences with the area in question. During the interview they were asked to communicate the importance of the photos and what the image meant to them. With this, the participants were able to recollect pa st experiences within the area. Discuss the meaning those experiences
58 held on them. It was a way to get more in depth discussions on the meanings of the site/landscape. For this thesis, the researcher understood that the non expert would probably need help understanding the meanings and definitions of the socio cultural values they were asked to discuss. With this unde rstanding, the back of the ha nd out was designed to have example pictures of each value and key words/examples to help the participants understand the meanings of those values. Thirty people were questioned over two separate trips to St. Augustine. First the random participants wer e asked if they were familiar with the Government House and what they knew about it. If they were not familiar and did not know much about the building, the researcher handed them the consent form for them to read and the handout about the Government Hous e. After they read a little the researcher asked questions about their residency and how often they came to the area. After they digested the information the researcher asked if they thought the Government House was important and why. Then the researche r pointed to the photo elicitation side of the handout and asked which one of the values they thought was most significant out of the four, why, and the least significant? The last question the researcher asked was what they thought would be the best use of the Government House. In conclusion, this research study employed qualitative methods and tools to assess a broader range of heritage values. Phase one of this thesis involved pre design research with interior design students which consisted of researc hing the structure, determining the character defining features, determining ADA accessibility requirements, and presenting the research and designs to the stakeholders involved.
59 Also, a key element in phase one was the interviewing of the expert stakehol ders to determine how they valued the Government House and what they felt the best use of the building should be. Phase two consisted of analyzing the pre design research and determining what questions were beneficial to the study and creating a more effi cient questionnaire that random people on the street could understand. Another final element to phase two was obtaining thirty random participants to answer the questionnaires in St. Augustine at the Government House. 1 John Creswell. The Selection of a Research Design. In Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Lincoln: Sage Publications, 2009: 4. 2 Richard Sommer and Barbara Sommer. A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002: 220. 3 Ethnographic Methods for the Assessment of Cultural Values in Heritage Con servation Los Angeles: The Getty Conservation Institute, 2000: 31 49. 4 Authenticity in more than one dimension: reevaluating a core premise Forum Journal 2010: 37 41. 5 Ethnographic Methods for the Assessment of Cultural Values in Heritage Conservation Los Angeles: The Getty Conservation Institute, 2000: 37. 6 Richard Sommer and Barbara Sommer. A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002: 116. 7 Richard Sommer and Barbara Sommer. A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002: 141. 8 Action Research uses research methods to engage stak eholders in the process to help facilitate change. Ferrance, Eileen. Themes in Education: Action Research Providence: Northeast and Islands Regional Educational, 2000. 9 sustainab University of Florida News March 24, 2010, http://news.ufl.edu/2010/03/24/leed buildings/. 10 http://www.nps.gov/nr/national_register_fundamentals.htm 11 Randall Ma Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage 2002: 5 30. 12 Visual Studies 2002: 13 26.
60 13 Bustam, Tinelle Dallas Place Attachment, Power Mechanisms, Landscape Valuation, and Attitudes Toward Protected Area Management of Everglades National Park, Florida Dissertation, Gainesville: University of Florida, 2009.
61 CHAPTER 5 ANALYSIS OF DATA RESEARCH The purpose of this study was to aid in developing a more inclusive approach to assessing cultural heritage values. In order to improve the value assessment process of historic structures, it may be neces sary to involve a wide range of stakeholders in the process. This thesis aimed to accompli stakeholders involved in the valuation process. However, in this thesis, another stakeholder group was added to make the process more inclusive. The second stakeholders were a group of thirty non expert stakeholders who were either residents or visitors from St. Augustine erviewed first in Phase One and the non expert stakeholder group was questioned in Phase Two. Phase One: Data Discussion During Phase One of the study, there were eight key stakeholders from both the University of Florida and the C ity of St. Augustine identified for a total of sixteen key stakeholders. These individuals participated in semi structured interviews conducted by either, graduate student Blair Mullins or Assistant Professor Morris Hylton III. The sixteen key stakeholde rs were identified because they were familiar with the heritage resources of St. Augustine; including the Government House. The interview questions for the University of Florida key stakeholders were developed first. After the University of Florida key st complete, the St. Augustine interview questions were developed and conducted. The difference between the two interview questions were essentially the same except they had to be modified to reflect the separate audience s.
62 Since t he initial question focused on the socio cultural values associated with the Government House: First, we want to ask you about your views on the significance and socio cultural values associated with the Government House Historical (i.e. What does the Government House embody for people? Spanish Coloni al period? English burning of c ity? 20th Century Reconstruction ?) Cultural / Symbolic (i.e. How does the Government House represent St. Augustine?) Social (i.e. Does the community use the building? Is it considered a public building?) Aesthetic (i.e. Does the scale and style of the Government fit in with the rest of the city?) All sixteen stakeholders agreed that the historical and cultural/symbolic values associated with the Government House were highly significant. There were two people from the University of Florida stakeholder group thought that the social value associated with the Government House was not a primary significance and another university stakeholder thought the Government House was not really a social place. Seven out of the eight St. Augustine stakeholders thought that the aesthetic value was not one of the primary values associated with the Go vernment House. Four out of the eight University of Florida stakeholders thought that the aesthetic value was not one of the primary values associated with the Government House. Overall, eleven out of sixteen of the stakeholders thought that the aesthetic value was not one of the primary values associated with the Government House. stakeholder from St. Augustine thought the cultural/symbolic value was the most significant of the four values discussed during the interview. Five of
63 the eight University of Florida stakeholders thought the cultural/symbolic value was the most significant of the four values discussed during the interview. The other four of the university stakeholders thought the historical value was most significant values associated with the Government House. Overall, when asked what they think the best variety of community uses, visitor center, and acade mic uses. There was a strong feeling of keeping the Government House open for social events for the community. A conference public space was mentioned on numerous occasions. Table 5 1 pinions Socio Cultural Values Most Significant Value Not Primary Significance Historic 3 0 Cultural/Symbolic 12 0 Social 0 2 Aesthetics 0 11 stakeholders when discussing the best use for the Government House. Most participants talked about academic use and public access/social events as being the most significa nt use for the Government House. A couple of the university stakeholders mentioned a need for a small conference center as did the St. Augustine stakeholders. It seems after analyzing both the responses from the University of Florida and St. Augusti ne s takeholders that most agree the Government House is extremely significant and the cultural/symbolic socio cultural value is the most significant. These stakeholders understand that Government House is not just an old building but it symbolizes St. Augusti ne. The city is the oldest European settlement in the United
64 as embodied by the Government House. Phase Two: Data Discussion Phase two was completed approximately four months after phase one. Phase two involved the researcher standing near the physical building of the Government House and asking random people to participate in the questionnaire. The researcher asked the questions while another graduate student, Clarissa Carr, wrote the answer s down. It should be explained that St. Augustine is considered a tourist town. The Government House is located in the heart of the tourist area. That is mostly why the researcher decided to provide an informational handout to the participants of the se cond phase because they may not be familiar with the Government House. If the participants stated that they were not familiar with the structure, the researcher would read off a few of the facts from the informational handout about the Government House to familiarize them. After the researcher conveyed the facts, she would ask the participants if they thought the Government House was significant and why. After the researcher questioned a couple tourists/visitors and relayed the facts from the handout, sh e noticed that their answers may have been influenced by the handout instead of their own opinions. Although the opinions of visitors were not discounted, the decision was made, given the time limitations of the study, to focus on year round and seasonal residents with more familiarity with the Government House. Overall, thirty people participated over two weekends; one weekend in November 2010 and one weekday in January 2012. All of the thirty self selected questioned w ere of Caucasian desc ent and there were fifteen men and fifteen women. The age range of the women were almost evenly distributed however, the males
65 questioned were mostly in their twenties, thirties, and forties. There was only one male in his s ixties and one in his fifties (t hese age ranges are approximate ). T he participants were asked basic demographic questions and then they were asked if they thought the Government Ho use was significant. T he participants were then asked which socio cultural value (from the handout) was most important and which was the least important, in terms of the Government House. The tab le below displays their answers. Table 5 2. E m ost significant socio cultural value Historic Beauty Social Symbolic Total=18 Total=5 Total=2 Total=3 Female=9 Female=3 Female=1 Female=0 Male=9 Male=2 Male=1 Male=3 Table 5 3. E l east significant socio cultural value Historic Beauty Social Symbolic Total=1 Total=2 Total=14 Total=7 Female=0 Female=0 Female=6 Female=4 Male=1 Male=2 Male=8 Male=3 One participant did not answer the least significant socio cultural value question. One participant walked away for the least significant socio cultural value question. Three participants thought every value was significant, so they did not answer the least significant question. The last question that the participants were asked was focused on the best use for the Government House. They were asked: What do you think would be the best use for this building considering the most significa nt value you chose? Their answers are compiled in the table below. Table 5 4. Ex b est u se for the Government House Best Use Visitor Information/Tourism=5 Social/Community Use=10 Government Presence/Civic Use=1 Museum=8 Historic=1 Hotel=1 Current Use=6 Art Exhibit=1 No Opinion=2 A few of the participants specified more than one use for the building and those are noted in the above table as well.
66 In light of the information collected, the majority of the stakeholders identified that the social value was least significant even though the majority believed that the building should be used for community and social events. This result is contradictory. It seems that the m ight not understand significance or how they value the structure but they kn ew how they wanted it used Another interesting detail that came from the data collection was that many of the were not that knowledgeable about the Government House even though they lived in St. Augustine for many years. Despite this lack of knowledge about the building they still had an attachment to it and had strong feelings on how it should be used. It was obvious that the felt that the build ing was significant even though they were unfamiliar with its history and function. The historic value was o verwhelmingly chosen as the most significant value out of the four values presented to the participants, with eighteen out of thirty responses. The beauty value was next in the most significant value chosen, with five out of thirty responses. As stated previously the social value was the highest chosen as the least significant value with fourteen out of thirty responses. The symbolic value was next in the highest chosen for the least significant value with seven out of thirty responses. It could be understood that the value the historic aspect of the Government House even though they were not that familiar with its history or function Stakeholder Groups Combined Overall, most of the people that were either interviewed or questioned had strong feelings about how the building should be used. The general consensus between both expert and non expert groups w ere that the building should continue to be open to the public and the community
67 that the second floor should be used for academic purposes in addition to the first floor being used for the public/co mmunity and social events. There seemed to be an understanding between the members of the and the community of St. Augustine should work together and use the building to further both goals. all felt that the Government House is one of the most significant buildings in St. Augustine. The stakeholders were not nearly as familiar with the structure as had lived in St. Augustine for years and the University of Florida stakeholders did not even live in the city. This may suggest that the layers of history and the functions of the Government House should be advertised and promoted for community and tourist knowledge and enjoyment. Another outcome of the data collection is that the Government House needs better signage in order to interpret people what the purpose is especially if the structure is used for public use. stakeholder group s it is obvious the two groups are not aligned in their evaluation of the responses revealed that the symbolic value is the most significant. The that the social value is the most significant. This confirms that all voices should be heard during the valuation process or important view s may not be apparent.
68 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION The current discipline and practice of preservation in the United States utilizes a fabric based approach to assess the value of cultural heritage resources. However, it is becoming increasing ly more common for professionals within the field, and in allied fields, to explore a more values centered approach. Using a more values centered approach helps identify the wide array of values affiliated with a site by a large range of stakeholders Wh en a preservation professional assesses a historical site, one of the first steps is to determine if building materials are authentic and h ow old they are. With a values centered approach, the site is assessed differently. The first step is not to try to determine what part of the site is authentic; it is trying to determine why the site is valued by users and by a community. A more values centered approach is not concerned with authenticity as much as it is concerned with what values make a place specia l to the people that use it appreciate it and care for it This idea is illustrated by Barbara G. Anderson she talks about a particular reconstruction of a church at Baker University in her book chapter, The Importance of Cultural Meaning in Defining an d Preserving a Sense of Place 1 This chapter discusses how Baker University reconstructed a church from the United Kingdom instead of building an entirely new worship center. Anderson describes the situation perfectly, The message this story holds for p reservationists is that the Baker University community values the chapel as a part of their community. By reconstructing the chapel, Baker University met a practical need for a place of worship. More importantly, as opposed to new construction, the recon structed chapel is imbued with cultural meaning that supports their sense of place. 2
69 The chapel, even though it is not the original, is still extremely significant to the Baker University community. Values assigned to heritage sites by stakeholders can be Typically, American preservation professionals use the National Register of Historic Places criteria 3 for evaluating a historic resource. Th ese criteria, however do not address the values centered approach that is discussed in this thesis. T he criteria only recognize resources that were either designed, built, or occupi ed by a famous person, able to provide prehistory information, or contribute to an understanding of Purposefully broad, these criteria do not address social significance, cultural significance, among others, or whose history is important. This study proposes a more inclusive approach to assessing cultural heritage values associated with the Government House of St. Augusti ne. By including a wide range of stakeholders and asking what they thought was significant about the Government House it was discovered that the building is not only significant because it is historic but it is also culturally/symbolically significant. A typical preservation professional would probably first determine that the Government House was historically significant, that is the most apparent value. However, this thesis probed the stakeholders and determined that historical was not the only value t hat is associated with the Government House, cultural/symbolic was also important. The cultural/symbolic significance of the Government House really reflects the entire history, evolution, and use of the building. Throughout its history, p eople congregat ed there to discuss daily life and the happenings of the town. It was also determined that the Government House is symbolically important to the stakeholders because of what the
70 building symbolizes; the civic pride of the community and an anchor for the c ity. There has always been a civic use on this site that dates back to the settlement of the Spanish in the 1500s. This seems to be reinforced by stakeholders. There was one issue that should be considered and explored. The resident/visitor group chose the social value as the least significant value. This outcome is unanticipated because they chose a social use fo r the structure. T his may seem contradictory however, it may indicate also that the resident/visitor group did not understand the values que stion or they did not understand how they felt about the building until it was put into a tangible context. They may have needed to first think about how the building is used and then think about the values associated with it. An overall theme that was not anticipated at the o ut set of this study was that many St. Augustine residents did not know much about the Government House at all. Some of them had never gone inside the building. Even though they did not know much about the structure they still had a strong connection with it and wanted it to be open and used for community occasions and events. This may be contributed to its prominent location on the historic plaza. From the data that was collected, it was determined that the intangible social and civic significance was one of the most, if not the most significant va lue associated with the Government House by both stakeholder groups This thesis proves that a more inclusive approach to assessing cultural heritage values results in a more detailed u nderstanding of the structure and how people truly value it. Even though the resident/visitor group did not chose social as the most significant value, they chose it as the best use for the building which means they do actually appreciate it as a value
71 as sociated with the Government House. Without this study it may not have become apparent that the building users and stakeholders want the building to be used for the community of St. Augustine for social events and occasions. Limitations There were limita tions to this study. First, the expert stakeholders that were chosen were extremely knowledgeable about the Government House and St. Augustine. This is not always the case. Usually the expert is hired to write a National Register nomination and may no t be familiar with the site but they are familiar with the nomination process. A second limitation to this study was that St. Augustine is a tourist city and while collecting data, the researcher gave many visitors the questionnaire but some did not have any knowledge or connection with the site in question. That made it difficult to use the questionnaires because those participants may not have fully understood the values they assigned. Thirdly, there are always challenges and difficulties associated with conducting research in a public venue; engaging self selected subjects, and administering questionnaires. The photo elicitation handout may have been a little difficult for the resident/visitor group to understand. It may have been better to have nu merous pictures for each value instead of just one so the participants get a better understanding of the definition. Also, the historic photo was a little grainy and some may have thought it was a bad picture and not chosen it because they thought they we re making their decision based on the photos. It is recommended that if photo elicitation is used in the
72 future, that the pictures be high quality and there be at least two or more for each value with a detailed description for each term. Lastly, there is an issue that many of the resident/visitor group did not know a whole lot about the Government House. If the participants did not really know about the building, they read the informational handout about the Government House which influe nced and limited the ir answers. O nce the researcher identified this issue only residents with familiarity of the Government House were chosen With the amount of residents and visitors that were unfamiliar with the Government House it may be appropriate for the University of Florida and the City of St. Augustine to develop a way to engage this stakeholder group and educate them about this important structure. One way may be to have signage on the actual building that stands out and could be read by the people passing by. Future Recommendations This thesis can be considered a first step in the process of an Action Research i study where an actual change is accomplished. This thesis involved two groups of stakeholders to determine the values associated wi th the Government House and to determine the best use of the structure. The n ext step to this study would be to revise and continue with the questionnaires and include more stakeholders such as other residents in the city that may not visit the Government House very often It was determined that all stakeholders involved agreed that the Government House should continue to be open and available to the St. Augustine community and general public for social events i See list of definitions for action research.
73 The data collection process determined tha t all stakeholders who were interviewed believed that either the historical and social values are the most significant values associated with the Government House. T his information could help determine how the building will be used in the future. For exa mple, the museum (that is already located in the building on the ground floor) could be updated to reflect the history and story of the Government House as well as the City of St. Augustine. Social was another value that was defined as significant. Using this information, the Government Hous e could continue to be used as an event space for the public including weddings, conference type procedures, and parties A small coffee shop or caf installed on the ground floor utilizing the attached courtyard coul d also be a way to sustain the social aspect that was identified as significant to the stakeholder groups. Another item that may be addressed at a later date would be to mail a survey to the people that live in the area surrounding the Government House. A mail out survey could reach a broader range of stakeholders that may not visit the plaza on a regular basis. Sommer and Sommer in A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research 4 suggest using mail surveys to reach a large amount of people as well as a way to keep travel costs down. A mail out survey would also give participant s time to contemplate their answers and offer more thoughtful respon ses A mail out survey may also provide a large r sample size, helping improve reliability Overall, more focus by the heritage professionals on involving a wide r range of stakeholders in the process of evaluating historic resources is highly suggested Also, using a more values centered approach in combination may yield a richer more diverse interpretation of the site This approach is justified by the results of this study.
74 1 The Importance of Cultural Meaning in Defining and Preserving a Sense of Place Preservation of What for Whom? ed. Michael Tomlan (Ithaca: The National Council for Preservation Education, 1998) 127 135. 2 I bid. 3 ow to Apply the National Register http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm 4 Richard Sommer and Barbara Sommer. A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002: 147 148.
75 APPENDIX A INTERVIEW SHEET FOR UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA STAKEHOLDERS Adaptive Use and Rehabilitation of Government House St. Augustine, Florida Interview Questions University of Florida Stakeholders Name: ________________________________________________________ Gender: _______________________________________________________ College / Department: ___________________________________________ Position: _____________________________ _________________________ Number of years in position: _______ What are your primary responsibilities?
76 First, we want to ask you about your views on the significance and socio cultural values associated with the Government House 1. Historical (i.e. What does the Government House embody for people? Spanish Colonial period? English burning of City? 20th Century Reconstruction ?) 2. Cultural / Symbolic (i.e. How does the Government House represent St. Augustine?) 3. Social (i.e. Does the community use the building? Is it considered a public building?) 4. Aesthetic (i.e. Does the scale and style of the Government fit in with the rest of the city?) 1. Programming (i.e. Classes, lectu res, community planning/design charettes) 2. Use of Buildings What types of activities has your College / Department / Unit undertaken in St. Augustine? Now, we want to ask you about your thoughts on the types of activities the University of Florida might undertake in St. Augustine 1. Research 2. Teaching 3. Service 4. Other
77 N ow, we want to ask you about your thoughts on how the University of Florida can best use the Government House building to support its activities in St. Augustine 1. Learning spaces (lecture spaces, seminar rooms, studios, laboratories, etc.) 2. Archives for St. Augustine materials 3. Offices and Meeting Spaces 4. Rental Spaces for Revenue 5. Others How do you think the Government House can more effectively be used by the community of St. Augustine?
78 Would you like to add any additional comments about the adaptive use and rehabilitation of the Government House as a University of Florida and St. Augustine Research Center?
79 APPENDIX B INTERVIEW SHEET FOR ST. AUGUSTINE STAKEHOLDERS Adaptive Use and Rehabilitation of Government House St. Augustine, Florida Interview Questions St. Augustine Stakeholders Name: Gender: Affiliation: Position: Number of years in position: What are your primary responsibilities?
80 First, we want to ask you about your views on the significance and socio cultural values associated with the Government House Do you consider the Government House a significant building? If yes, why? 1. Historical (i.e. What aspect of history does the building represent? Spanish Colonial period? WPA and 20th Century Reconstruction ?) 2. Cultural / Symbolic (i.e. What aspects of culture does the building symbolize, such as civic pride? Is it associated with traditional community events, such as ceremonial locking of the gates?) 3. Social (i.e. How does the community and others local or otherwise use the building today?) 4. Aesthetic (i.e. How would you describe the style and design of the building? Does it represent St. A? Do you think the architecture contributes to the significance of the building?) Rank Socio Cultural Values: Historical____ Cultural/Symbolic_____ Social____ Aesthetic_____
81 1. Programming (i.e. Classes, lectures, community planning/design charettes, etc.) 2. Use of Buildings Now, we want to ask you about your thoughts on the types of activities the University of Florida might undertake in St. Augustine? 1. Research 2. Teaching 3.Service 4.Other
82 What types of activities and events has the City of St. Augustine held in the building? How do you think the Government House can more effectively be used by the community of St. Augustine? Would you like to add any additional comments about the adaptive use and rehabilitation of the Government House as a University of Florida and St. Augustine Research Center?
83 APPENDIX C EXPERT STAKEHOLDER MATRIX
87 APPENDIX D NON EXPERT GROUP QUESTIONNAIRE
88 APPENDIX E NON EXPERT GROUP VALUES PHOTO E LICITATION HANDOUT
89 APPENDIX F NON EXPERT GROUP GOVERNMENT HOU SE INFORMATIONAL HAN DOUT
90 APPENDIX G INFORMED CONSENT FORM
91 APPENDIX H NON EXPERT GROUP MATRIX
94 LIST OF REFERENCES Adams, William R. Preserving St. Augustine. ND. http://colonialstaugustine.org/11.html (access ed Nov 9, 2011). Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Section 106 Regulations Summary. April 22, 2002. http://www.achp.gov/106summary.html#intro (accessed January 31, 2011). Anderson, Barbara G. "The Importance of Cultural Meaning in Defining and Preserving a Sense of Place." In Preservation of What, for Whom? by Ed. Michael Tomlan, 127 135. Ithaca: The National Council for Preservation Education, 1998. Australia ICOMOS Incor porated. The Burra Charter: the Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance. Charter, Burwood, Australia: Australia ICOMOS Incorporated, 2000. Avrami, Erica, Randall Mason, and Marta de la Torre. Values and Heritage Conservation. Research Report, Los Angeles: The Getty Conservation Institute, 2000. Bowe, Kristen. Five more UF buildings receive LEED certification for high sustainability. Gainesville, FL, March 24, 2010. Bustam, Tinelle Dallas. Place Attachment, Power Mechanisms, Landscape Valuation, and Attitudes Toward Protected Area Management of Everglades National Park, Florida. Dissertation, Gainesville: University of Florida, 2009. City of St. Augustine. Government House Museum. "From City of St. Augustine website" http://www.staugustinegovernment.com/visitors/gov house.cfm (photo retrieved October 30th, 2011). Clark, Allen C. "Robert Mills, Architect and Engineer." Columbia Historic Society Vol40/41 1940: 1 3 5. New Rochelle Studio http://www.columbia.edu/itc/architecture/bass/newrochelle/extra/emin_dom.html Creswell, John. The Selection of a Research Design. In Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Lincoln: Sage Publications, 2009. The Codes Project. The Law of the Indies: The Codes Project. 2004. http://codesproject.asu.edu/sites/default/files/code_pdfs/Laws_of_indies.pdf (accessed October 17, 2011). de Mestas, Hernando. St. Augustine, c.a. 1593. "From Columbia University: Art History and Archaeology Database" http://www.mcah.columbia.edu/dbcourses/publicportfolio.cgi?view=1511 (photo retrieved October 17 th 2011).
95 Ferrance, Elieen. Themes in Education: Action Research. Bo oklet, Providence: Brown University, 2000. Gallagher, Nora. Toward a Framework for Preserving Mid Century Modern Resources: An Examination of Public Perceptions of the Sarasota School of Architecture. Thesis, Gainesville: University of Florida, 2011. Gordo n, Elsbeth K. Florida's Colonial Architectural Heritage. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2002. Gordon, Stephen. "Historical Significance in an Entertainment Oriented Society." In Preservation of What, for Whom? by Michael, ed. Tomlan. Ithaca: Th e National Council for Preservation Education, 1999. Harper, Douglas. "Talking About Pictures: a Case for Photo Elicitation." Visual Studies 2002: 13 26. Hester, Randy. "Subconscious Landscapes of the Heart." Places Vol.2 No.3: 10 22. ICOMOS. Internation al Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites The Venice Charter. Charter, Venice: ICOMOS, 1964. ICOMOS, UNESCO, and ICCROM. "The Nara Document on Authenticity." Nara Conference on Authenticity. Nara, Japan: ICOMOS, 1994. Internati onal Committee on Intellectual Cooperation. "The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments." First International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic Monuments. Athens: ICOMOS, 1931. Low, Setha M. "Anthropological Ethnographic Methods for the Assessment of Cultural Values in Heritage Conservation." Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage 2002: 31 49. Mackintosh, Barry. "National Park Serivce: A Brief History." National Park Service History. 1999. http://www.nps.gov/history/hi story/hisnps/NPSHistory/npshisto.htm (accessed January 2011). Mason, Randall. "Assessing Values in Conservation Planning: Methodological Issues and Choices." Assessing Values of Cultural Heritage 2002: 5 30. Mason, Randall. "Fixing Historic Preservation: A Constructive Critique of "Significance"." Places 2004: 64 71. Mathers, Clay, Timothy Darvill, and Barbara J. Little. "Introduction." In Heritage of Value, Archaeology of Renown by Clay Mathers, Timothy Darvill and Barbara J. Little, 10 11. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2005.
96 Matthews, Janet. UF Historic St. Augustine Inc.: Government House. February 18, 2011. http://www.staugustine.ufl.edu/govHouse.html (accessed March 11, 2011). Metropolitan Dade County, Petitioner, v. P.J. Birds, Inc., Res pondent. No. 93 1578 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, April 12, 1995). Michael, Vince. "Conserving Community is What We Do ." Forum Journal 2010. National Park Service. Historic Sites Act of 1935. 1935. http://www.nps.gov/history/local law/FHPL_HistS ites.pdf (accessed January 31, 2011). National Park Service History: Antiquities Act of 1906. November 24, 2004. http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/hisnps/npshistory/monuments.htm (accessed January 31, 2011). National Register of Historic Places Brochure. ND. http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/publications/bulletins/brochure/#evaluating (accessed August 21, 2011). National Register of Historic Places Fundamentals: How to List a Property in the National Register. June 12, 2011. http://www.nps.gov/nr/national_ register_fundamentals.htm (accessed October 13, 2011). Section II: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. ND. http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm (accessed February 2011). National Trust for Historic Prese rvation. 2011 This Place Matters Community Challenge. 2011. http://www.preservationnation.org/take action/this place matters/community challenge/ (accessed February 12, 2011). Pannekoek, Frits. "The Rise of a Heritage Priesthood." In Preservation of What, for Whom? by Michael, ed. Tomlan. Ithaca: The National Council for Preservation Education, 1998. Rains, Albert, and Laurence Henderson. With Heritage So Rich. Accumulation of Essays, New York: Random House, 1966. RS&H et al. St. Augustine: Historic Area S trategic Plan. Gainesville: University of Florida, 2009. Sommer, Robert, and Barbara Sommer. A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Spennemann, Dirk H.R. "Gauging Community Values in Historic Preservation." CRM J ournal 2006: 6 20.
97 St. Augustine Government. "Historic Preservation." City of St. Augustine. ND. http://www.staugustinegovernment.com/your_government/harb arch guidelines/3%20 %20Historic%20Preservation.pdf (accessed October 16, 2011). St. Augustine Histo rical Society. "St. Augustine Historical Society/Timeline." staugustinehistoricalsociety.org. 2011. http://www.staugustinehistoricalsociety.org/timeline.pdf (accessed Nov 9, 2011). The St. Augustine Record. Government House: StAugustine.com. 2011. http://staugustine.com/history/government house (accessed October 17, 2011). St. Augustine Record. St. Augustine Florida, The Nation's Oldest City 2011. http://staugustine.com/history/nations oldest city (accessed November 9, 2011). Tainer, Joseph A, and John Lucas. "Epistemology of the Significance Concept." Society for American Archaeology 1983: 707 719. UNESCO. World Heritage Convention: The Criteria for Selection. 2011. http://whc.unesco.org/en/criteria/ (accessed October 12, 2011). World H eritage List Nominations. 2011. http://whc.unesco.org/en/nominations/ (accessed October 13, 2011). World Heritage List Nominations. 2012. http://whc.unesco.org/en/nominations/ (accessed February 9, 2012). United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultu ral Organization. The Organization's History. 2011. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/about us/who we are/history/ (accessed October 2011). University of Florida. Charles F. Hopkins, Postmaster St. Augustine, Florida. "From Digital Collections" http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00004997/00001?search=government+=house+=st.+=august ine (photo retrieved October 30th, 2011). University of Florida. Historic St. Augustine. January 12, 2012. http://www.staugustine.ufl.edu/ (accessed February 9, 2012). University of Florida. Post Office, St. Augustine, Fla. 1906. "From Digital Collections" http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00005318/00001/1j?search=government+%3dhouse+%3dst. +%3daugustine (photo retrieved October 30 th 2011). University of Florida. Provost Guard House, St. Augustine, Fla. Photographed Dec. 6 th 1864. "From Digital Collections" http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00005317/00001?search=government+=house+=st.+=augu st ine (photo retrieved October 30 th 2011).
98 University of Florida. View of the Governor's House at St. Augustine in East Florida, Novr 1764. "From Digital Collections" http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00026480/00001?search=government+=house+=st.+=august ine (photo retrieved October 30 th 2011). Wells, Jeremy C. "Authenticity in More than One Dimension: Reevaluating a Core Premise of Historic Preservation." Forum Journal 2010: 37 41.
99 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Blair Mullins graduated high school in the year 2000. After high school she joined the United States Air Fo rce to experience and see the world and other parts of the United States. She also joined the military to earn the GI Bill because otherwise she could not afford to attend college. After her four year career of maintaining F 15s engines for the Air Force she was honorably discharged. She immediately enrolled and attended college. She graduat ed from the University of Florida in 2008 with a Bachelor of Science in ps ychology While attending the University of Florida she was studying p sychology full time and she working at Magnolia Plantation Bed and Breakfast full time as well. While she le arned about p sychology at school she was learn ing about historic structures as the manager of the bed and breakfast. As the years went on and she graduated with a Psychology degree and she realized t hat her heart did not lie with p sychology but with the h istoric buildings she was working in at the bed and breakfast The owners of the bed and breakfast and her boyfriend encouraged her to look into the Master of Historic Preservation program at the University of Florida. As she began researching the progra m and the field of preservation she realized that it suited her perfectly. Prior to her research she did not k now that historic preservation was an actual career field. She was accept ed to the Master of Historic Preservation program in March 2010 and attended the Preservation Institute: Nantucket that summer. In the fall of 2010 she founded the Historic Preservation Student and Alumni Organization at the University o f Florida. Before that, there was not an organization for the historic pres ervation students to connect with the alumni That organization currently has over twenty paying members and many more non
100 paying members as well. She just stepped down as acting President after two years. Blair Mullins graduate d i n May 2012 moved to Jacksonville, Florida to begin her career in preservation