Preservation Groups Struggle to Save the Surroundings of Historic Sites : Landmarks: Many are already hemmed in by tract homes and factories. Activists are fighting for buffer zones to maintain the original context.

From George Washington’s Mt. Vernon to Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello, from Yorktown to Appomattox, preservationists are fighting to save the rich vistas and heritage of Virginia.

Their foes are those who want to build modern housing, factories and office buildings alongside Civil War battlefields and 18th-Century plantations.

“What Virginians have done very well is to save the houses where Jefferson and Washington have slept and ate,” said Carter Hudgins, director of the Center for Historic Preservation at Mary Washington College in Fredericksburg. “It’s easy to save those things which are one of a kind.

“The more difficult thing is to go the next step and save the surrounding land, which puts the site in perspective. If you lose the setting, you lose the context. You lose the meaning of what the world was all about to begin with.

“It’s very, very difficult to get people to understand that anyone who goes to visit Monticello will have an experience that’s diminished dramatically if they stand on top of Thomas Jefferson’s mountain and gaze on the rear end of condominiums.”

Virginia’s preservationists don’t stand alone.

Across the nation many historic sites are neglected or menaced by development, said Peter Brink, programs and services vice president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation in Washington.

For example, in South Pasadena, Calif., a proposed six-mile stretch of freeway would cut through five National Register historic districts and destroy 1,500 houses.

“To an extent, we are seeing more potential conflicts between preservationists and developers, especially on the East Coast and West Coast, because of the type of urban sprawl that is happening,” Brink said. “What’s needed is a way to plan development, channel it so it doesn’t obliterate the countryside.”

Preservationists also need to plan ahead, so they are working to control development before the bulldozers are rolling, he said. That is happening now at Antietam National Battlefield Park in Maryland, much of which is still privately owned.

Historic sites are often saved by, not in spite of, developers, Brink said.

“Three-fourths of the time, we consider ourselves partners with developers,” he said.

In January, officials at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville dropped plans to trade off land at the base of Monticello Mountain so a large office complex could be built on the site.

People in Stafford County have debated whether the land adjoining George Washington’s boyhood home should be zoned to allow commercial uses.

Near Culpeper, Va., California developer Lee C. Sammis has acquired 5,200 acres along the Rappahannock River, where the Battle of Brandy Station was fought in 1863. Historians have described it as one of the last great cavalry battles.

Sammis has offered for public use 242 acres that a historic consultant deemed significant ground in the battle, said Michael Armm, development director for the project, Elkwood Downs. The land offered is connected by trails.

Armm said he agreed that “there has to be some perspective,” a buffer area around the property--but, he said, some critics insist that “if you stand on the site and look around, you shouldn’t be able to see anything that wasn’t seen from the battle.”

“Some kid a hundred years from now is going to get interested in the Civil War and want to see these places. He’s going to go down there and be standing in a parking lot. I’m fighting for that kid,” said local historian Brian Pohanka said. He was one of hundreds of people who protested the plan in June, on the 127th anniversary of the battle.

It is already too late for some places.

Factories spew smoke across the James River from Shirley Plantation in Charles City County. Last year, the 18th-Century plantation had 53,500 visitors. A subdivision has been built downriver from the factories.

Trees planted across the river in Chesterfield County have helped to soften the view, said Charles Carter, whose family lives on the plantation.

“Tourists are dismayed. I have had more than one group of English folk who said, ‘We’d never allow this!’

“Once the historic integrity of an area has been affected, it doesn’t go back the other way.”

In Waterford, residents concerned about development encroaching from the Washington area formed a compact and are raising money to buy property. They have asked farmers who own land surrounding the town for the right of refusal when they sell , said Katherine Ladd, director of the Waterford Foundation. The compact and its negotiation with developers led to Waterford’s name being removed from the National Trust list of endangered historic places.

Would-be restorers of historic sites can take advantage of a one-time rehabilitation tax credit, which allows a deduction of 20% of the federal income tax up to $7,000, Brink said.

In Virginia, the Threatened Property Fund, started in 1988, provides $500,000 a year to help pay for restoring and saving historic properties, said David J. Brown, executive director of Preservation Alliance of Virginia and director of the fund.

The revolving fund buys properties, resells them, and buy easements that restrict what later owners may do with the property.

The state also allows localities to freeze real estate taxes on historic properties.

“These kinds of incentives and credits encourage people to go ahead and take those risks,” Brown said.