DOCSLIB.ORG

Benthic TMDL for Stroubles Creek in Montgomery County, Virginia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Benthic TMDL for Stroubles Creek in Montgomery County, Virginia Benthic TMDL for Stroubles Creek in Montgomery County, Virginia Submitted by: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Prepared by: Department of Biological Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech October 9, 2003 Revised October 16, 2003 Project Personnel Virginia Tech, Department of Biological Systems Engineering Brian Benham, Assistant Professor and Extension Specialist Kevin Brannan, Research Associate Theo A. Dillaha, III, Professor Saied Mostaghimi, Professor Rachel Wagner, Graduate Research Assistant Jeff Wynn, Research Associate Gene Yagow, Research Scientist Rebecca Zeckoski, Research Associate Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Jason Hill, West Central Regional Office, Roanoke George Devlin, West Central Regional Office, Roanoke David Lazarus, State Office, Richmond Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (VADCR) Mike Shelor, TMDL Project Coordinator, Richmond Dean Gall, Nutrient Management, Dublin Tom Roberts, Stormwater Management, Dublin For additional information, please contact: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) Water Quality Assessment Office, Richmond: David Lazarus, (804) 698-4299 West Central Regional Office, Roanoke: Jason Hill (540) 562-6724 Saied Mostaghimi, BSE Project Director, (540) 231-7605 Email: [email protected] Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.........................................................................................................1 1.1. BACKGROUND........................................................................................................... 1 1.2. SOURCES OF SEDIMENT............................................................................................. 2 1.3. MODELING ................................................................................................................ 3 1.4. BENTHIC TMDL FOR SEDIMENT ............................................................................... 3 1.5. PROJECTED FUTURE CONDITIONS ............................................................................. 5 1.6. TMDL REDUCTIONS AND ALLOCATIONS.................................................................. 5 1.7. REASONABLE ASSURANCE ........................................................................................ 7 1.8. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION............................................................................................. 7 CHAPTER 2: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................8 2.1. BACKGROUND........................................................................................................... 8 2.1.1. TMDL Definition and Regulatory Information................................................. 8 2.1.2. Impairment Listing............................................................................................ 8 2.1.3. Watershed Location and Description ............................................................... 8 2.1.4. Pollutants of Concern ....................................................................................... 9 2.2. DESIGNATED USES AND APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS ..................... 10 2.2.1. Designation of Uses (9 VAC 25-260-10) ........................................................ 10 2.2.2. General Standard (9 VAC 25-260-20)............................................................ 11 CHAPTER 3: WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION ..................................................................................13 3.1. WATER RESOURCES ................................................................................................ 13 3.2. ECOREGION ............................................................................................................. 13 3.3. SOILS AND GEOLOGY .............................................................................................. 13 3.4. CLIMATE ................................................................................................................. 14 3.5. LAND USE ............................................................................................................... 14 3.6. FUTURE LAND USE ................................................................................................. 15 3.7. WATER QUALITY DATA .......................................................................................... 16 3.8. BIOLOGICAL MONITORING DATA............................................................................ 17 CHAPTER 4: BENTHIC STRESSOR ANALYSIS........................................................................................22 4.1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 22 4.2. ELIMINATED STRESSORS ......................................................................................... 23 4.3. POSSIBLE STRESSORS .............................................................................................. 26 4.4. MOST PROBABLE STRESSOR ................................................................................... 36 CHAPTER 5: THE REFERENCE WATERSHED MODELING APPROACH ................................................38 5.1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 38 5.2. TMDL REFERENCE WATERSHED SELECTION ......................................................... 38 5.2.1. Comparison of Potential Watersheds ............................................................. 38 5.2.2. TMDL Reference Watershed Selection ........................................................... 40 5.3. TMDL MODELING TARGET LOADS ........................................................................ 40 CHAPTER 6: MODELING PROCESS FOR TMDL DEVELOPMENT...........................................................41 6.1. SOURCE ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT ....................................................................... 41 6.1.1. Surface Runoff................................................................................................. 41 6.1.2. Channel and Streambank Erosion .................................................................. 41 6.1.3. Point Source TSS Loads.................................................................................. 42 6.2. GWLF MODEL DESCRIPTION.................................................................................. 42 6.3. SUPPLEMENTAL POST-MODEL PROCESSING............................................................ 44 6.4. INPUT DATA REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................. 45 6.4.1. Climate Data................................................................................................... 45 Benthic TMDL for Stroubles Creek in Montgomery County, Virginia i 6.4.2. Land Use ......................................................................................................... 45 6.4.3. Hydrologic Parameters................................................................................... 47 6.4.4. Sediment Parameters ...................................................................................... 48 6.5. ACCOUNTING FOR SEDIMENT POLLUTANT SOURCES............................................... 49 6.5.1. Surface Runoff................................................................................................. 49 6.5.2. Channel and Streambank Erosion .................................................................. 49 6.5.3. Point Source.................................................................................................... 49 6.6. ACCOUNTING FOR CRITICAL CONDITIONS AND SEASONAL VARIATIONS ................ 51 6.6.1. Critical Conditions ......................................................................................... 51 6.6.2. Seasonal Variability........................................................................................ 51 6.7. GWLF MODEL PARAMETERS ................................................................................. 52 CHAPTER 7: THE BENTHIC TMDL FOR SEDIMENT ................................................................................54 7.1. BACKGROUND......................................................................................................... 54 7.2. THE STROUBLES CREEK BENTHIC TMDL............................................................... 56 7.3. SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 60 CHAPTER 8: BENTHIC TMDL IMPLEMENTATION ...................................................................................62 8.1. STAGED IMPLEMENTATION ..................................................................................... 62 8.2. LINK TO ONGOING RESTORATION EFFORTS ............................................................ 63 8.3. REASONABLE ASSURANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION.................................................. 63 8.3.1. Follow-Up Monitoring.................................................................................... 63 8.3.2. Regulatory Framework ................................................................................... 64 8.3.3. Stormwater Permits ........................................................................................ 65 8.3.4. Implementation Funding Sources ................................................................... 66 CHAPTER 9: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.....................................................................................................67
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Stroubles Creek Watershed: History of Development and Chronicles of Research
    The Stroubles Creek Watershed: History of Development and Chronicles of Research By Tammy Parece Stephanie DiBetitto Tiffany Sprague Tamim Younos VWRRC Special Report No. SR48-2010 VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY BLACKSBURG, VIRGINIA May 2010 Acknowledgments This document compiles past and contemporary research reports on the Stroubles Creek watershed. Acknowledgements are due to many Virginia Tech faculty/students and larger community members who have studied the Stroubles Creek for nearly one hundred years. The development of this comprehensive report was made possible by a National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Undergraduates (NSF REU) program funding (Grant No. 0649070) which provided summer internship support to two co-authors of this report, i.e., Ms. Stephanie DiBetitto (University of Vermont) and Ms. Tiffany Sprague (James Madison University). Others who made significant contributions to this report include Dr. Gene Yagow (VT Biological Systems Engineering Department), Dr. James Campbell (VT Geography Department), Ms. Llyn Sharp (VT Geosciences Outreach), Dr. Vinod Lohani (VT Engineering Education), Ms. Tara McCloskey and Ms. Erica Adams (Geography Department Graduate Students), and Ms. Erika Karsh a volunteer summer research assistant from Oberlin University. ******************************************** Disclaimer The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied,
    [Show full text]
  • Montgomery County Reconnaissance Level Survey
    UlT 51 \Þ1. ¡ .fCO M Ol.J MERY COL-I NTY J { : I €t þ"d {x',n:, t s @ t s ('- {'. HISTORIC SITES SLJRVEY VOLLJ ME 1 JULY, 1986 Montgomery County Reconnaissance Level Survey July, 1986 INTRODUCTION Since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 1983, Montgomery County has experienced increased development and population growth. In light of this growth, the Planning Commission became aware of the need for a tool to help plan growth and still preserve the County's historical and architectural resources, The need to inventory these resources was evident. In 1985, Montgomery County applied and received a matching grant from the Division of Historic Landmarks to perform a Reconnaissance Level Survey of the County's architecturally significant buildings. This survey includes the following: 1) An Overview of the County's History 2) A Comprehensive Inventory of significant structures and sites in the County--including photographs and floor plans and; 3) Maps delineating the location of said structures and sites. It is anticipated that thfs survey will be a useful resource in future planning activities such as the evaluation of rezoning requests, the revision of the Comprehensive Plan and potential amendments of the County's Zoning Ordfnance to create a Historic District Overlay. Further, it will provide citizens interested in doing historical, archaeological. and genealogical research with valuable information. The following individuals contributed to the realization of this final report. Gibson Worsham, Architect Dan Pezzoni, Surveyor Charlotte Worsham, Architectural Historian David Rotenizer, President, New River Valley Chapter, Archeological Society of Virgdnia Frank Lorino Jeanie Maslich, Planning Department Secretary Valerie McBrayer, Secretary Bill Ruska, Planning Staff Nancy Ward, Planning Staff TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume I: Introduction Table of Contents Survey Methodology ...................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tammy Erlene Parece, August 2016
    Curriculum Vitae – Tammy Erlene Parece, August 2016 Tammy Erlene Parece Email: [email protected] Website: https://tammyparece.wordpress.com/ Education Ph.D., Geospatial and Environmental Analysis, 2016, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Dissertation Title: Geospatial Analysis to site Urban Agriculture. M.S., Geography, 2010, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Thesis Title: Managing water and electricity consumption in university residence halls: a study on promoting voluntary resource conservation by college students. Graduate Certificate - Geographic Information Systems, 2008, Virginia Commonwealth University. B.S., Interdisciplinary Studies, 2006, Virginia Commonwealth University. John Tyler Community College, Chesterfield, Virginia. 1994 – 2000. Central Virginia Community College, Lynchburg, Virginia. 1983 – 1987. College of DuPage, Glen Ellyn, Illinois. 1978 – 1979. Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana. (Tammy Erlene Witthoft). 1977. Academic Work History Colorado Mesa University, Grand Junction Colorado, starting August 2016 Instructor of Geography, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences Virginia SNAP Ed Program. Summer 2016. GIS Analyst. Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia Instructor Introduction to Remote Sensing. Summer 2014. Introduction to Human Geography. Summer 2011 & 2012. Assistantships - Teaching College of Natural Resources and Environment’s First Year Experience Course. 2014 – 2015. Introduction to Remote Sensing. Fall 2012 & 2013. Department of Geography. Analysis
    [Show full text]
  • Corrective Action Permit Radford Army Ammunition Plant in Radford
    COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Street address: 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219 Molly Joseph Ward Mailing address: P.O. Box 1105, Richmond, Virginia 23218 David K. Paylor Secretary of Natural Resources www.deq.virginia.gov Director (804) 698-4000 1-800-592-5482 April 1, 2016 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Mr. Jay Stewart Environmental Manager Radford Army Ammunition Plant 4050 Pepper’s Ferry Road Radford, Virginia 24141 Re: Approval of Reissuance of Hazardous Waste Management Corrective Action Permit Radford Army Ammunition Plant, Radford, VA EPA ID No.VA1210020730 Dear Mr. Stewart, Enclosed is the Final Hazardous Waste Management Corrective Action Permit for the Radford Army Ammunition Plant facility, Radford, Virginia. The Final Permit issuance has been approved and is scheduled to become effective on May 1, 2016. This final permit decision is in accordance with the Virginia Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (VHWMR), 9 VAC 20-60, 9 VAC-20-60-124, which incorporates 40 CFR Part 124 by reference, and in accordance with 40 CFR § 124.13, Obligation to Raise Issues and Provide Information During the Public Comment Period, which specifies: All persons, including applicants, who believe any condition of a draft permit is inappropriate or that the Director’s tentative decision to deny an application, terminate a permit, or prepare a draft permit is inappropriate, shall raise all reasonably ascertainable issues and submit all reasonably available arguments and factual grounds supporting their position, including all supporting material, by the close of public comment period (including any public hearing) under §124.10). Any supporting materials which are submitted shall be incorporated in full and may not be incorporated by reference, unless they are already part of the administrative record in the same proceeding, or consist of Commonwealth or federal statutes and regulations, documents of general applicability, or other generally available reference materials.
    [Show full text]
  • The 22°D Annual Research Symposiulll and Exposition
    The Graduate Student Assembly Proudly Presents: The 22°d Annual Research Symposiulll and Exposition Wednesday, March 29, 2006 Multipurpose Room, Graduate Life Center Sponsors: 1. Office of the Provost 2. College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences 3. College of Natural Resources 4. College of Science 5. College of Agriculture and Life Sciences 6. Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine Preface & Acknowledgements The Research Symposium and Exposition of Virginia Tech is a forum that provides graduate and undergraduate students a unique opportunity to showcase their scholarly pursuits and achievements in their respective academic fields. The symposium is intended to stimulate interaction and exchange of ideas among faculty, staff and students from a variety of disciplines and backgrounds. This year's Symposium has three entry formats that allow all students of Virginia Tech to present in the medium that is appropriate for their work. The three entry formats are: • Poster Presentation • Visual Presentation • Lecture, Speech or Performance Presentation Participants were able to choose from seven entry categories for the 2006 Research Symposium: • Advanced Undergraduate • Agriculture and Animal Sciences • Arts, Architecture and Urban Studies • Engineering • Natural and Biological Sciences • Physical Sciences • Social Sciences and Humanities I would like to congratulate all of the participants for their outstanding accomplishments and willingness to share their work with the Virginia Tech community. All of the research presented is truly impressive and serves as a testimony to the high caliber of academic and research programs at Virginia Tech. There are many people to thank for their efforts and hard work in organizing and running this event.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Stroubles Creek Watershed TMDL Implementation Plan Montgomery County, Virginia
    Upper Stroubles Creek Watershed TMDL Implementation Plan Montgomery County, Virginia Submitted to: The Stakeholders of the Stroubles Creek Watershed Prepared by: Stroubles Creek IP Steering Committee, Virginia Tech Department of Biological Systems Engineering, and Virginia Water Resources Research Center In Cooperation With: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Revised: May 24, 2006 VT-BSE Document No. 2005-0013 TMDL Implementation Plan for Stroubles Creek Benthic Impairment May 24, 2006 Project Personnel Stroubles Creek Project Support Team Gene Yagow, VT-BSE Research Scientist Brian Benham, VT-BSE Assistant Professor and Extension Specialist Tess Wynn, VT-BSE Assistant Professor Tamim Younos, Virginia Water Resources Research Center, Interim Director Jason Hill, VDEQ Mary Dail, VDEQ Theresa Carter, VDCR Stroubles Creek IP Steering Committee Ron Bonnema Llyn Sharp John Bush Matt Stolte Mary Dail Rita Thompson David Dent Tina Thompson Curtis Elswick Shawn Utt Cynthia Hancock Jack Webster Justin Laughlin David West Stuart Lynde Lindsay West Mike Rosenzweig Stroubles Creek Project Support Team Adele Schirmer Agriculture/Rural Focus Group Chris Barbour Lori Lester Adele Schirmer Lowell Bowman Susan Mirlohi Llyn Sharp Theresa Carter Craig Nessler Julie Still Abi Convery Dwight Paulette Rita Thompson Mary Dail Elizabeth Reed Tamim Younos Dean Gall Barry Robinson Martha Wirt Justin Laughlin Andrew Schenker Tess Wynn Residential/Urban Focus Group Chris Barbour Bill Elvey David Simpson
    [Show full text]
  • New River Valley Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy
    New River Valley Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2019 New River Valley Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Table of Contents NEW RIVER VALLEY OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................................... 2 NEW RIVER VALLEY SWOT ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... 10 PRIORITIES, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................... 17 ANNUAL PROJECT PACKAGE REPORT ......................................................................................................... 23 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................................ 28 New River Valley CEDS 2019 Page 1 NEW RIVER VALLEY OVERVIEW 1. SUMMARY The New River Valley region consists of the counties of Floyd, Giles, Montgomery, Pulaski, and the City of Radford, and is home to ten incorporated towns. Much of the area is rural, consisting of mountain forests and farmland, with small communities of 1,000-10,000 residents that share many characteristics of neighboring Appalachian communities in southwest Virginia and West Virginia. The region has been growing steadily in recent years, especially in the “college towns” of Blacksburg (Virginia Tech) and Radford (Radford University) and in nearby Christiansburg. The activities of the two universities are
    [Show full text]
  • DEQ Office of Water Supply Update
    March 2017 Update Virginia's Phase III Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Update: Local Engagement Program for the Chesapeake Bay Clean Up In light of the strong emphasis on local engagement for the Phase III WIP, Virginia has developed and begun implementing a local engagement program that will continue throughout the Phase III WIP development process and beyond. The components of the local engagement program include: . Ongoing meetings of the Chesapeake Bay Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG). This group is comprised of representatives of the agricultural, conservation, development and industrial communities as well as representatives of local governments and soil & water quality conservation districts. The state will be providing updates to this group and eliciting their comments on all aspects of Phase III WIP planning, including the local engagement program. Outreach to local government, soil & water conservation district and stakeholder association meetings to provide continuous updates throughout the Phase III WIP process. Initial regional outreach meetings to local governments and soil & water conservation districts throughout the Chesapeake Bay Watershed portion of the state (currently on-going). Facilitated work sessions for local governments, soil & water conservation districts and stakeholders. These work sessions will involve training on the various tools available for the development and prioritization of pollutant reducing strategies and how to report Best Management Practices (BMPs). On-going assistance to local governments and stakeholders and outreach. For more information, visit the webpage below or contact Joan Salvati at [email protected],(804) 698- 4230. http://www.deq.virginia.gov/Programs/Water/ChesapeakeBay/ChesapeakeBayTMDL.aspx DEQ Office of Water Supply Update: Virginia Water Withdrawal Reporting Regulation: DEQ appreciates the assistance of the VASWCD and Districts as we continue to register farms to report water withdrawals.
    [Show full text]
  • New River Valley Planning Region Local Action Plan Summary
    15. NEW RIVER VALLEY PLANNING REGION LOCAL ACTION PLAN SUMMARY WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN AND LOCAL SUMMARIES OVERVIEW WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN Virginia is fortunate to contain a wide variety of natural resources and landscapes that provide Virginians with a range of benefits, services, and economic opportunities. Natural resource conservation in Virginia, as in most states, is implemented by government agencies, non- governmental organizations, private institutions, academic institutions, and private citizens. These groups work to enhance the quality of life within the Commonwealth by conserving Virginia’s air, land, water, and wildlife. Adequate funding and human capital needed to manage and conserve these valuable resources are not always available. In 2005, Virginia’s conservation community first came together to maximize the benefits of their actions and created the state’s first Wildlife Action Plan (Action Plan). It was written to prioritize and focus conservation efforts to prevent species from declining to the point where they become threatened or endangered (DGIF 2005). The 2015 Action Plan is an update of the original Plan. The Action Plan must address eight specific elements mandated by Congress. They are: 1. Information on the distribution and abundance of species of wildlife, including low and declining populations as the state fish and wildlife agency deems appropriate, that are indicative of the diversity and health of the state’s wildlife; and 2. Descriptions of locations and relative condition of key habitats and community types essential to conservation of species identified in (1); and 3. Descriptions of problems which may adversely affect species identified in (1) or their habitats, and priority research and survey efforts needed to identify factors which may assist in restoration and improved conservation of these species and habitats; and 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Burruss Hall 130 Attendees
    Energy & Sustainability Committee Meeting Minutes 09/23/19 2:00 - 3:00pm | Burruss Hall 130 Attendees: Kayla Smith for Sherwood Wilson, Debbie Greer for Ken Miller, Jon Clark Teglas for ​ Chris Kiwus, Blake Bensman for Frances Keene, Denny Cochrane, Scott Kerklo, Rob Glenn, Rob Lowe, Virgilio Centeno, Elena Spinei Lind, Matthew Eick, Sean McGinnis for Erin Hopkins Guests: Nathan King, Kate Franczek, Nick Quint, Jody Booze Daniels, Barbara Wise, and ​ Sandy Hancock Welcoming Remarks and Introductions Review of E&SC Charge To review and provide advice to the University Administration on broad policy issues relating to the university’s pursuit of environmental quality through action, education, and engagement to address current needs without compromising the capacity and needs of future generations. Meeting Agenda Approved: Virgilio Centeno motion to approve, second by Scott Kerklo ​ Old Business 2018-19 Green RFP Implementation ● Formal process for students to submit sustainability ideas to leadership for approval and funding consideration ● AY 2018-19 record 66 student proposals submitted, with record 18 of those approved ● Record funding of $552,000 ● Since program initiated in AY 2010-11, 83 proposals and $1.2 million Title (In recommended Student Organization Cost priority order) 1. Indoor LED Lights- Math Office of Energy $194, 300 Emporium Management- Student Interns 2. HVAC Upgrade- Math Office of Energy $8, 000 Emporium Management- Student Interns 3. Hallway LED Lights Environmental Innovation $10, 700 Payne Hall 4. Newman Library & Environmental Coalition $14, 300 University Bookstore Outdoor LED Lights 5. Cassell Coliseum UAP 3354 $16, 700 Parking Lot LEDs 6. Green Lab Initiative Office of Sustainability- $3,700 Student Intern Waste Team 7.
    [Show full text]
  • New River Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization Bus Stop Safety and Accessibility Study Final Report |July 2015
    New River Valley FINAL REPORT Metropolitan Planning Organization Bus Stop Safety and Accessibility Study for the Town of Blacksburg JULY 2015 New River Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization Bus Stop Safety and Accessibility Study Final Report |July 2015 Executive Summary Purpose The New River Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization Bus Stop Safety and Accessibility Study developed a data-driven prioritization tool to guide the efficient allocation of resources to bus stop improvements in the Town of Blacksburg. These improvements are intended to improve safety around and access to bus stops within the Town of Blacksburg to encourage the use of transit for bus riders who walk, bike, or have mobility impairments. Process The study involved periodic work sessions with a Technical Committee that was composed of representatives from Blacksburg Transit, the Town of Blacksburg Planning and Building Department, the New River Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization, and the New River Valley Regional Commission. The project team developed several prioritization criteria that were used to evaluate and rank the 65 bus stops identified by the Technical Committee and stakeholders as needing improvement. Discussions with stakeholder yielded information from a local perspective about transit needs. · The Bus Stop Safety and Accessibility Study created a prioritization tool and developed recommendations for the twenty highest-ranked bus stops. The study also offers recommended improvements for strategic bus stop corridors and the Blacksburg Transit system as a whole. · Key themes for bus stop recommendations include: o Enhancement of sidewalk connectivity and accessibility, o Installation of accessible concrete landing pads, and o Clear and consistent delineation of bus stops, which may include standardized signage, curb markings, and pavement markings.
    [Show full text]
  • The Log Outbuilding at Solitude: an Architectural and Archaeological Investigation of Virginia Tech’S Second Oldest Building
    The Log Outbuilding at Solitude: An Architectural and Archaeological Investigation of Virginia Tech’s Second Oldest Building by Michael J. Pulice Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Architecture Humberto Rodriguez-Camilloni Chair Joseph R. Loferski Charles Clifford Boyd May 1, 2000 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Solitude, architecture, archaeology Copyright 2000, by Michael J. Pulice The Log Outbuilding at Solitude: An Architectural and Archaeological Investigation of Virginia Tech’s Second Oldest Building Michael J. Pulice Abstract Solitude is a National Register historic property that is today a central part of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University campus. The property was purchased in 1872 to create the site of the land-grant college that later became VPI. The focus of this study is a log dependency associated with the extant nineteenth century mansion on the property. Both buildings have suffered extensively from deterioration in recent years, but are now receiving some attention. By substantially augmenting a historic structure report on the outbuilding filed in 1989, this thesis contributes to the building’s documentation and accurate interpretation. As one of two early structures on the site that still retains a large percentage of its original fabric, it is an important artifact that should be preserved for posterity. Documentation through meticulous research is an important part of preservation. When the building is physically gone, knowledge of it will survive. Little was known about the dependency prior to the completion of this research. The best guess on its age appears to have erred by thirty years.
    [Show full text]