ARB continues Mary Washington monument accessibility and door replacement item to allow documentation on door condition

The Fredericksburg Architectural Review Board continued the portion of COA 2508-0142 dealing with replacement of a side (Hitchcock Street) door at the Mary Washington monument site to give the applicant time to document the door’s condition and provide additional options.

Staff told the board the application, filed by Sally Harmon, would install pathways and other accessibility alterations at the memorial site and that the Memorials Advisory Commission toured the property and supported the landscaping plan. The board had previously approved portions of the application but continued the proposed replacement fiberglass door because the design guidelines discourage molded substitute doors for historic openings.

Sally Harmon said the lodge building’s change of use — Washington Heritage Museums offices and staff/service entry — made durability and functionality priorities. "With this new program ... that side door will be the staff entrance," Harmon said, explaining why the applicant prioritized durability and a wider opening for supply and catering access.

Historic Fredericksburg Foundation’s Denae Peckler urged the board to prefer repair over replacement, citing National Park Service guidance (Preservation Brief 16) and warning that substitute materials such as fiberglass can undermine long-term historic integrity. Washington Heritage Museums’ chair Chuck Fennell said the existing door and jamb were in extremely poor condition and that repair would be prohibitively costly given repeated modifications and rot; he said the organization could not sustainably maintain a wooden door in that location and offered to retain the removed door on-site for future restoration if the board allowed replacement now.

Board members expressed divergent views: some said the door appeared repairable and asked that any widened replacement be in wood; others were persuaded by site-use and durability arguments. The board voted to continue the door portion of the COA to the next meeting to allow the applicant to provide documentary evidence that the door is beyond repair and to offer additional product information (flat-panel options, life-cycle comparisons) and clarifications.

Ending: The board continues the door replacement portion of COA 2508-0142 and asked the applicant to return with documentation of the door’s condition and additional product options for consideration at the November meeting.