The Sitka Historic Preservation Plan

Sitka Historic Preservation Commission City and Borough of Sitka Sitka,

Sea Level Consulting Sitka, Alaska September 2010

A Guide to Cultural Resource Management

The Sitka Historic Preservation Plan

Prepared for the

City and Borough of Sitka Scott McAdams, Mayor Phyllis Hackett, Sitka Historic Preservation Commission Assembly Liaison

City and Borough Planning Department Wells Williams, Director Melissa Henshaw, Planner II

And

City and Borough of Sitka’s Historic Preservation Commission James Kinsman Dale Williams Peter Gorman Pat Eliason Judith Ozment Roby Littlefield

Gail Johansen-Peterson, City and Borough of Sitka Contract Secretary

By

Anne E. Pollnow, Author William DeArmond, Editor Sea Level Consulting PO Box 6326 Sitka, Alaska (907) 738-0794

Adopted October , 2010 Ordinance No. 10-

Cover photo: Sitka from the water, ca. 1897, Frank La Roche photo. (University of 2010)

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1 LEGAL BASIS ...... 2 A VISION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION ...... 3 STATEMENT OF GOALS ...... 4 INTRODUCTION ...... 5 Historic Resources...... 5 Preservation Planning ...... 6 METHOD & PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ...... 7 Survey Results and Trends Affecting Historic Preservation in Sitka ...... 8 HISTORIC CONTEXT ...... 9 Physical Setting and Community Status ...... 9 General Cultural Chronology of the Sitka Area ...... 10 Ia. Prehistory (Prehistoric) ...... 11 Ib. Native Lifeways (Historic or Proto-Historic)...... 12 II. Exploration and Settlement ...... 13 III. Military and Government ...... 16 IV. Commerce and Economic Development ...... 21 V. Transportation and Communication ...... 27 VI. Intellectual and Social Institutions ...... 28 VII. Disasters and Natural History ...... 33 CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA’S HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM ...... 34 Past Efforts ...... 34 The Sitka Historic Preservation Commission ...... 38 RECOMMENDATIONS & ACTIONS ...... 41 CONCLUSION ...... 49 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 50 APPENDIX A: CHRONOLOGY OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION LAWS AND ITS RELATION TO THE CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA AND THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ...... 53 APPENDIX B: CONTENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE...... 60 APPENDIX C: ECONOMIC REASONS FOR A MUNICIPALITY TO INVEST IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION...... 61 APPENDIX D: PUBLIC SURVEY FORM ...... 62

APPENDIX E: ADGENDA FOR PUBLIC MEETING ...... 63 APPENDIX F: ALASKA’S CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAM ...... 64 APPENDIX G: 1997 SITKA HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN ...... 73 APPENDIX H: SITKA FLOWCHART ...... 75 APPENDIX I: COMMISSION REVIEW FORMS ...... 76

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: houses known as the Indian Village with Russian Warehouse and American Flag in foreground, Sitka ca. 1890. (University of Washington 2010)...... 1 Figure 2: ANB Convention, Sitka, 1914. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 2 Figure 3: Brevet Major General Jefferson C. Davis, Commander of the U.S. Army 9th Infantry detachment sent here for the transfer. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 2 Figure 4: Class photograph, Sitka Industrial Training School, Elbridge W. Merrill Photographs, ca. 1897-1929. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 3 Figure 5: Sitka. ca. 1913-1939. Wickersham State Historic Site Photographs, 1882-1930's. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 4 Figure 6: Front view of St. Michael Cathedral. nd. Michael Z. Vinokouff Photograph Collection. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 6 Figure 7: Chief Annahootz standing in front of Clan House in Sitka. ca. 1913. (University of Washington 2010) ...... 7 Figure 8: Gathering in front of Pioneer Home. ca. 1934. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 8 Figure 9: Map of Traditional Tlingit Country. ca. 19th century (HOPE III, Andrew, 2003) ...... 9 Figure 10: Map of City and Borough of Sitka ...... 9 Figure 11: Sitka from Castle Hill. ca. 1897. LaRoche photo. (University of Washington 2010) ...... 11 Figure 12: Stone tools from Noow Tlein (Castle Hill) archaeological excavations (McMahan 2002) ...... 12 Figure 13: Plan of Tlingit fort at Indian River as drawn by Lisianski 1805. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 13 Figure 14: Sea Otter, a sketch from Captain Cook's journal Voyage to the Pacific Ocean. ca. 1760s (Alaska Digital Archives 2010)...... 14 Figure 15: Magnetic Observations being made by F. P. Ulrich at Sitka in 1929. (USGS 2000) 15 Figure 16: Baranof Warm Springs ca. 1925. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 15 Figure 17: Castle Hill, 1889. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 16 Figure 18: U.S.S. Pinta. 1886. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 17 Figure 19: Former U.S. Naval Mess Hall and Bakery now Mt. Edgecumbe H.S. cafeteria. (Alaska DNR 1980) ...... 18 Figure 20: WWII military build-up on , ca. 1940's. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 18 Figure 21: Figure 4. Sitka Indian Village ca. 1920’s with sealers in foreground. Merrill Photo No. 80 (Theodoratus, 1995) ...... 19 Figure 22: U.S. Survey 1474 originally completed in 1923 (Alaska Department of Natural Resources 2010) ...... 19

Figure 23: BLM/ANCSA meetings, ANB Hall, Sitka, April 11, 1975...... 20 Figure 24: Dryng herring spawn, 1915. (University of Washington 2010) ...... 21 Figure 25: Chinese Tea Brick, 1891...... 22 Figure 26: Lucky Chance Mine, Sitka, n.d. (University of Washington 2010) ...... 22 Figure 27: Students in Peter Simpson's boat shop. ca. 1890 (Sitka Tribal Library 2010) ...... 23 Figure 28: Ag. Station Sitka, 1914. (University of Washington 2010) ...... 23 Figure 29: Tlingit Fish Traps. (Emmons and De Laguna 1991) ...... 24 Figure 30: Herring Fishing, 1928. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 24 Figure 31: Sitkoh Bay Cannery, ca. 1910. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 24 Figure 32: Goddard Hot Springs, ca. 1920. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 25 Figure 33: Mill worker in Sitka. n.d. (University of Washington 2010) ...... 26 Figure 34: Shoreboat ―Dorothy‖. ca. 1950 (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 27 Figure 35: Ships anchored in Sitka Harbor. ca. 1890. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 27 Figure 36: See House and St. Peters Episcopal Church, 1914. (University of Washington 2010) ...... 28 Figure 37: Russian Orthodox Cemetery. nd. (University of Washington 2010) ...... 29 Figure 38 Beach before construction of Crescent Harbor in the mid-1960s...... 29 Figure 39: School, 1913. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 29 Figure 40: Lover's Lane, Sitka National Historical Park, ca. 1890-1920. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 30 Figure 41: Sitka Pioneer Home, 1940. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 31 Figure 42: Mt. Edgecumbe Hostital. ca. 1950. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) ...... 32 Figure 43: Khaasdahe’en (Indian River), 1887. (University of Washington 2010) ...... 33 Figure 44: Aftermath of the 1966 fire downtown Sitka. (Sitka Tribal Library 2010) ...... 33 Figure 45: U.S. Post Office, ca. 1930-40s ( 2010)...... 37

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Sitka Historic Preservation Commission initiated this strategic plan to provide goals and objectives for historic preservation efforts within the City and Borough of Sitka. It was developed with the input and participation of many individuals and groups across the municipality with the assistance of the State of Alaska’s Office of History and Archaeology under the Department of Natural Resources. Comments were received from surveys, public meetings, and personal communications. In the coming years, a number of significant challenges, but also an equal, if not greater, number of opportunities will arise for Sitka. In addition to survey and inventory work, the Commission will focus on education and outreach, increasing funds for historic preservation, and assisting the community of Sitka in land use planning and the promotion of sustainable development. In partnership with agencies, organizations and individuals, the Commission will work to identify, interpret and preserve ancient and historic places for the enrichment of the present and the benefit of future generations.

The development of this plan was made possible through a Federal Historic Preservation Fund matching grant, administered by the Alaska Office of History and Archaeology, and reserved for communities of Certified Local Government status. The City and Borough of Sitka provided the forty percent match. The Sitka Historic Preservation Commission, the public, and the Office of History and Archaeology reviewed and commented on draft plans during its development; those comments were considered in the unfolding of the final plan.

Figure 1: Tlingit houses known as the Indian Village with Russian Warehouse and American Flag in foreground, Sitka ca. 1890. (University of Washington 2010)

1

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

LEGAL BASIS Offices and, in subsequent amendments to the Act, the Certified Local Government Historic preservation as a valid public (CLG) program was created. This purpose was clearly established during the partnership among federal, state, tribal and 20th century. The U.S. Constitution local governments is the framework for recognizes that states have a right to use public preservation activities nationwide police power to regulate use of private land today (Abele 2010). and establish public controls (Euclid v. Amber 1926). Sitka is one of thirteen Certified Local Governments recognized by the State of The U.S. Supreme Court specifically Alaska’s State Historic Preservation Office recognized historic preservation as a and the Department of the Interior’s legitimate function of government and local National Park Service. One of the historic preservation laws as an appropriate requirements for status as a CLG is that the means to accomplish the community’s municipality prepares and regularly updates historic preservation goals. This ruling was a Historic Preservation Plan. A Plan was made in Penn Central Transportation v. City initially drafted in 1994 after the 1993 of New York, U.S. 108 (1978) and has not adoption of Ordinances No. 92-1075 and 93- been reversed (Cornell University 1978). 1105 (City and Borough of Sitka (Cornell University 1978). 1992,2010), which established and defined the scope of the municipal Historic The National Historic Preservation Act of Preservation program at that time. This Plan 1966, 16 U.S.C. §470 et seq, (National Park is an update of the original Plan and is Service, U.S. Department of the Interior intended to address a range of issues 2006), further declared historic preservation identified in the program’s operations over as an appropriate use of government’s legal the last fifteen years and meets CLG powers and established the Federal requirements for periodic review and government’s leadership role in this area. It revisions. also created the State Historic Preservation

Figure 3: Brevet Major General Jefferson C. Davis, Commander of the U.S. Army 9th Infantry Figure 2: ANB Convention, Sitka, 1914. (Alaska Digital detachment sent here for the Archives 2010) transfer. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) 2

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

A VISION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION

In the not too distant future, Historic Preservation in Sitka will be:  An essential strategy for maintaining a community’s unique sense of place.  A powerful tool for economic development.  A significant generator of jobs, income, and tax revenues.  An important way to understand how diverse cultures have come together to shape the community we know today.  A broad, inclusive movement that integrates its interests into community decision-making activities so that resources are identified, preserved, experienced, and enjoyed.

During the development of the City and Borough of Sitka’s 2007 Comprehensive Plan (City and Borough of Sitka 2007), the citizenry of Sitka expressed a clear vision of the importance of its cultural resources. The 2007 Comprehensive Plan, as adopted, addressed historic preservation in Chapter 2.4, General Land Use Goals 2.5, Urban Residential Goals and Policies, and Policies and 2.11, Arts and Cultural Goals and Policies. The following is an excerpt of community goals relating to historic preservation and more goals within this 2007 Plan are noted in Appendix A:

2.4.16.To publicly encourage community awareness of the value of protecting historic and cultural resources and to recognize organizations that improve the historic character of buildings and site. 2.5.3. To encourage the prevention of deteriorating building conditions and the rehabilitation of deteriorating residential areas, and to: A. Encourage the rehabilitation of older residential areas 2.5.4. To enhance the historic character of older neighborhoods, including the Native Village, work collaboratively with the Sitka Tribe of Alaska to enhance the historic and residential character of the village 2.11.4 To continue support of the Arts in the following way: B. In the planning stages of all City projects and projects needing City approval, assure that considerations are given to aesthetics, cultural issues, historic values, landscaping, and public art C. Assure protection and enhancement of historic places, including, but not limited to, cemeteries, historic buildings, landmarks, and public art.

Figure 4: Class photograph, Sitka Industrial Training School, Elbridge W. Merrill Photographs, ca. 1897-1929. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) 3

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

STATEMENT OF GOALS

City and Borough of Sitka Ordinance 2.58 (Ord. 93-1150 § 4, 1993; Ord. 92-1075 § 4 [part], 1992.) identifies as one of the Sitka Historic Preservation Commission’s duties to:

Develop a local historic preservation plan including provision for identification, protection, and interpretation of the area’s significant resources. Such a plan is to be compatible with the Alaska Historic Preservation Plan and produce information compatible with and for the Alaska Heritage Resources Survey (AHRS). The Plan shall be subject to review and approval by the assembly of the City and Borough of Sitka.

See Appendix G for the 1997 Sitka Historic Preservation Plan.

Therefore, the goals of this Historic Preservation Plan are to provide guidance and direction for the community in the preservation efforts of its cultural resources. The related objectives are identified and discussed under Recommendations and Actions.

 Identify, preserve, protect, and enhance Sitka’s historic, archaeological, architectural, traditional cultural, and scenic heritage.

 Encourage consideration of archaeological, historical, and cultural resources in the planning and decision making process of the public and private sectors.

 Educate and foster community pride and enable citizens and visitors to enjoy and learn about local history through the retention of the visible manifestation of this history.

 Contribute to the economic vitality of the City and Borough of Sitka through the promotion of heritage tourism and to encourage the expenditures associated with rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of historic buildings.

 Encourage new partnerships to expand and strengthen the historic preservation community.

Figure 5: Sitka. ca. 1913-1939. Wickersham State Historic Site Photographs, 1882-1930's. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) 4

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

INTRODUCTION

Historic Preservation is the practice of Historic preservation is beneficial to the protecting and preserving sites, structures, community in the following ways: and districts which reflect elements of local Culturally: a community is richer for having the or national cultural, social, economic, tangible presence of past eras and historic styles. political, archaeological or architectural history. Preservation has many diverse Economically: a community benefits from purposes and rewards, including the increased property values and tax revenues when strengthening of local economies, historic buildings are protected and made the focal point of revitalization and when the community is stabilization of property values, the fostering attractive to visitors seeking heritage tourism of civic beauty and community pride, and opportunities. the appreciation of local and national history. Socially: a community benefits when citizens take The history of a community contributes to pride in its history and mutual concern for the protection of the historic building fabric. its personality. Preserving the history of a place through its significant historic Developmentally: a community benefits from resources gives a community its unique having a concerted and well-defined planning character. Historic preservation provides a approach for the protection of historic buildings link to the roots of the community and its while accommodating healthy growth. people. Overall, historic preservation adds to Environmentally: a community benefits when the quality of life resulting in a more vibrant historic buildings are restored or rehabilitated community. Historic preservation involves rather than demolished and disposed of in the much more than simply saving and restoring community landfill. old buildings and sites of historic importance; there are economic, cultural, Educationally: a community benefits through teaching local heritage and the understanding of environmental, and educational benefits of the past and the resultant cultural respect by its historic preservation. All of which are citizens. inextricably connected to one another and to the living memory of involved communities.

Historic Resources Historic resources are defined as districts, a construction created to shelter human sites, structures, objects or buildings that are activity, while structures are functional greater than fifty years in age, and are constructions usually created for purposes significant in local, state or national history, other than creating human shelter. A site is architecture, archeology, engineering, or the location of a significant event, culture. History encompasses all cultures, occupation or activity, while an object is economic classes, and social, political and primarily an artistic creation such as a private activities that form the background sculpture, monument or statuary. A district to the present. Historic resources fall into is a collection of any or all of the above five categories or types: buildings, sites, which is united historically or aesthetically. structures, objects, or districts. A building is

5

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Preservation Planning Historic preservation efforts can be Historic preservation planning is important influenced by social, political, economic, for the following reasons: legal, and other factors. These influences come from private enterprises or public  To clearly state the goals of historic preservation in the community. agencies. Successful preservation planning recognizes these influences and uses a  To let residents know in advance how the process for resolving conflicts between community wants to grow and what the various interest groups and reaches community wants to protect. consensus within the community.  To assure consistency between various government policies that affects the With the adoption of a Historic Preservation community’s historic resources. Plan for Sitka’s current and future residents, business owners and other property owners  To educate and inform citizens about their will know in advance how the community heritage and its value to the community. intends to develop over time and what it  To create an agenda for preservation wants to preserve and protect. The plan will activities and to create a way to measure assist in providing for consistency among progress in protecting historic resources. City and Borough policies that affect the historic, archaeological, and cultural  Too comprehensively address issues relating landscape resources. to tourism, zoning, traffic, and development patterns and designs that affect historic preservation.

 To encourage economic development through the preservation of historic resources.

 To strengthen the political understanding of and support for historic preservation laws and policies.

Figure 6: Front view of St. Michael Cathedral. nd. Michael Z. Vinokouff Photograph Collection. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010)

6

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

METHOD & PUBLIC email to the leadership and membership INVOLVEMENT of the preservation organizations and stakeholders. The Plan has been prepared in conformance  On December 2, 2010, a public meeting with the Secretary of the Interior’s was held with notes taken by the Standards for Historic Preservation Commission’s contract secretary. See Planning. It began with research on the Appendix E for meeting agenda created existing documents related to historic by ARKOS, LLC. preservation within city government and the  A first draft by ARKOS, LLC was community’s history and resources. One of submitted in January of 2010. Upon the goals in developing the Plan was to dissatisfaction with that draft, lack of obtain and incorporate comments from a research efforts by ARKOS, LLC and wide range of people, organizations, and after several months of no public agencies. To that end, the following communication, the contract was outreach efforts were implemented: terminated in July of 2010. In August of 2010 Sea Level Consulting was hired to  A Certified Local Government grant was write the Plan. awarded to the City and Borough of  On September 20, 2010, a first draft of Sitka and the Sitka Historic Preservation the Plan by Sea Level Consulting was Commission in February of 2009 for the made available on the city’s web page purpose of writing/updating the Sitka for public comment. On October 11, Historic Preservation Plan of 1997. 2010, a second draft was posted. A  A volunteer hiring committee headed by press release was also issued then Commission Chair Peter Gorman encouraging interested parties to review was formed and the task of writing the and comment on the draft. The Plan was plan was initially awarded to ARKOS, also sent to the Alaska Office of History LLC in August of 2009. and Archaeology and the Sitka Tribe of  In November of 2009 presentations were Alaska for comment. made to a number of organizations,  In October the Plan went before the City business groups and marketing and Borough of Sitka Assembly and professionals in which representatives of passed, becoming an ordinance. ARKOS, LLC and Sea Level Consulting were present. Those parties included City and Borough of Sitka staff, Sitka Economic Development Association, the Sitka Chamber of Commerce.  Sitka Tribe of Alaska representatives were invited to participate in public meetings.  A one-page survey written by ARKOS, LLC and edited by the Sitka Historic Preservation Commission was

distributed by commissioners in key Figure 7: Chief Annahootz standing in front of locations around the community. The Clan House in Sitka. ca. 1913. (University of survey was also available electronically Washington 2010) on the city’s website and distributed via

7

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Survey Results and Trends Affecting The following is a compilation of survey Historic Preservation in Sitka results in their ranking of concern: As noted earlier, a public survey was distributed during the month of November Threats to Sitka’s Historic Resources: 2009 throughout the community and was 1. Lack of maintenance or available available on the City and Borough of Sitka’s funding for maintenance. website. The survey was developed by 2. Lack of formal protection. ARKOS, LLC and reviewed and edited by 3. Limited community awareness or the Commission and members of the public appreciation. at the Commission’s regular monthly 4. Little to no political support for historic meeting on October 14, 2010. A copy of the preservation survey is to be found in Appendix D. 5. Limited assistance to help preservation Following that meeting, Commission efforts. volunteers made copies of the survey at city 6. Poor physical conditions due to climate hall and boxes were made for the collection 7. Insensitive alterations to historic of the forms and placed in the following buildings locations: 8. Re-development pressure 9. Historic buildings are obsolete, cannot  Kettleson Library meet today’s functional needs  Backdoor and Highliner Coffee Shops 10. Non-local ownership  City and Borough of Sitka, Utility Department Community Needs:  Swan Lake Senior Center 1. Educational programs  Sitka Pioneer Home 2. Technical help for restoration or  The Sitka City Museum rehabilitation 3. Award programs to recognize good  Harrigan Centennial Hall preservation efforts.

4. List of grants and resources available for The survey was also sent via email to the historic preservation following organizations: 5. Mandatory protections for historic

buildings and areas.  Sitka Conservation Society 6. Written information about Sitka’s  Sitka Maritime Heritage Society historic buildings.  Cape Decision Lighthouse Society 7. Financial assistance for historic property  Sitka Convention and Visitors Bureau owners  The Island Institute 8. Protection for archaeological resources 9. Help in writing grant applications 10. Leadership on projects related to cultural heritage tourism

Figure 8: Gathering in front of Pioneer Home. ca. 1934. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010)

8

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

HISTORIC CONTEXT

An intensive survey of the cultural resources of the City and Borough of Sitka was conducted in 1997 by Vanguard Research, Inc. The report is a thorough compilation of written reference materials that relate to sites identified, including historical, ethnographic, and archaeological publications, journals, travel guides and popular books which contain information about history of Sitka and its surrounding environs. Themes in Alaska’s history were developed based upon the State of Alaska’s Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan and modified slightly for the 1997 report for Sitka (Betts 1997). Using these themes, the Plan continues to identify the prehistoric and historic make-up of the City and Borough of Sitka in an effort to assist the community in creating local criteria for preservation and protection efforts. A public process based upon this historic context section will further determine criteria for local register and historic district nominations.

Physical Setting and Community Status Sitka is located within Sitka Sound on the western side of (Figure 10). It is an area of land some 1600 square miles in the northwestern section of the , between the Southeastern Alaska mainland and the North Pacific Ocean. The Sound is partly sheltered from the open ocean by the main island and a number of outlying islands, providing a natural port and site for settlement. It is characterized by a temperate rain forest-maritime environment. Sitka is a unified municipal/borough government incorporated in 1971. The Borough, encompassing 2811 square miles on Baranof and southern Chichagof Islands, is the fourth-largest municipality by population in Alaska, and lies mostly within the bounds of the . The name ―Sitka‖ derives from the traditional Tlingit name for the locality, Sheey Atika or Shee’tka, meaning ―Place on the outside of Shee‖, the Tlingit name for Baranof Island (Figure 9). In 1804, the Russians officially named the town they had established as Novo , New Archangel, which became Sitka, or Sitkha as it translates from Cyrillic script.

Figure 9: Map of Traditional Tlingit Country. ca. 19th century (HOPE III, Andrew, 2003)

Figure 10: Map of City and Borough of Sitka 9

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

General Cultural Chronology of the Sitka Area Archaeological investigations indicate that people lived in as early as 10,000 years ago. Site location, artifact types, faunal assemblages, oral tradition, and historic records all show that human occupation and subsistence revolved around marine resources. Table 1 combines information from Moss (Moss 1993) and Arndt et. al. (Arndt 1987) into a cultural chronology that represents major changes.

Table 1: Cultural Chronology for Southeast Alaska

Period Age Characteristics Prehistoric Early 10,000 to 5,000 BCE* Marine mammal harvest, flaked stone tools Middle 5,000 to 1,500 BCE Shell middens, fish weirs, mass salmon harvest, ground stone tools Late 1,500BP to 1741CE Subsistence methods consistent with Middle period, introduction of forts Historic Early 1741-17997CE Russian, Spanish, French, English contact, beginnings of fur trade Middle 1799-1867CE Russian settlements, expanding trade Late 1867-1950CE American military rule, WWII, industry (fish, minerals, timber), population increase 1950-Present Recent Past

*years before 1950, BCE (Before Common Era) CE (Common Era)

Southeastern Alaska was occupied by the Tlingit people and had been for many centuries, at the time of the first European exploration of the area in the mid-18th century. In 1741 a Russian expedition led by and Alexei Chirikov, in two ships, set out for the fabled . Chirikov made landfall in July of that year on the shore of Yakobi or , but lost two boatloads of men trying to land and returned to without going ashore. The Russians did not return until the 1790s. They established a fortified settlement in 1804 after the ―‖ with the local Tlingit people. Sitka remained the headquarters of the Russian colonies in Alaska until the sale of Alaska to the in 1867.

Sitka served as the de facto and later formal seat of government under the U.S. administration until the governor’s office moved to Juneau in 1906. The town remained a small trading and commercial center until the late 1930s, with commercial fishing and a small local-use timber industry as the main economic activities. At the onset of World War II, the U.S. Navy air station at Sitka was commissioned and an influx of thousands of military men and civilian contractors changed the character of the town permanently. After the war ended in 1945, fishing and lumber resumed their former importance. The lumber industry was enhanced with the construction of a pulp mill in the late 1950s. Education and health care also became increasingly significant to the local economy. Cruise ship tourism to Alaska began in the 1880s and continued at a modest level until well after World War II. Major cruise lines began operating to Southeastern Alaskan waters in increasing numbers after the late 1970s.

Sitka has a unique and complex cultural background. Russians brought large numbers of , Aluutiqs, Koniags, and other western Alaskan people to Sitka, where they intermarried with the local Tlingit population. Starting in the late 19th century, establishment of the Sheldon Jackson

10

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

School brought Haida and young people to Sitka, where some of them stayed. Later, the boarding high school on Japonski Island brought thousands of young native people from western, northern and to Sitka, as it still does. Filipino, Japanese, and Chinese cannery workers became part of the culture starting in the early 20th century. By the 1840s, a significant number of Tlingit converted to Russian Orthodoxy and were employed by the Russians as laborers and boatmen.

Figure 11: Sitka from Castle Hill. ca. 1897. LaRoche photo. (University of Washington 2010)

From 1867 to the present, the U.S. military added yet another influence. In the gold mining era, people from all over the world came to Alaska. Although Sitka was never a mining center, some found their way there.

All these influences have made Sitka a culturally diverse community, in spite of its size and isolation.

Ia. Prehistory (Prehistoric) Much of the outer northwest coast was entirely ice-free and habitable 12,000 to 13,000 years ago at the time of the late Pleistocene Period. Local events of that era influenced the extent, intensity, and time of occupation. The earliest known sites of human occupation in the region coincide with a general warming trend accompanied by resulting vegetation changes, local glacial events, and receding sea levels. Most research in the region has focused on sites associated with the present sea level, dating within the last 5,000 years. The ethnographic record notes that the Tlingit people migrated from the interior to the islands and eventually to the outer coast of Southeast Alaska and Sitka and participated in maritime adaptive activities. The latest studies indicate trans-Pacific migration may have also been a viable route for settlement.

11

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Located on U.S. Forest Service property on the Noow Tlein (Castle Hill) northeast side of Baranof Island some 25 miles The archaeological excavations in the late 1990s at from Sitka, the, Hidden Falls (SIT-00119) site Noow Tlein (Big Fort), also known as Castle Hill, dates to over 9,000 years before present. This located in downtown Sitka, showed human site and its collection led directly to the most occupation dating to 1000 years ago. The site was a current timetable for early occupation of this 60-foot-high flat topped rock outcrop, historically with water on three sides, and was very defensible region. Stanley Davis, lead archaeologist, (Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation 2010). created the following chronological cultural This site was occupied by the Kiks.adi Tlingit, sequence for the region: including four clan houses (Luka Hit – Point House,  Paleomarine tradition, 9000-4500 BCE - Gagaan Hit – Sun House, Yaaw Hit - Herring House, and Noowtu Hit – Fort House). Other characterized by a well-developed significant sites that have led to a greater microblade industry with wedge-shaped understanding of the prehistory in the Sitka area cores, few if any bifacial artifacts, and an include, but not limited to: economic pattern based on coastal marine Hidden Falls (SIT-00119) subsistence. Starrigavan garden and middens (SIT-  00229) Transitional stage dating 4500-3000 BCE Lanaak (Redfish Bay Weir) (SIT-00078)  Developmental Northwest Coast stage - gave rise to the indigenous Northwest Coast societies which are known ethnographically. The Developmental Stage is characterized by increased artifact diversification, the appearance of specialized fishing and sea-mammal hunting technology, woodworking, large Figure 12: Stone houses, wealth-status objects, art, and large tools from Noow population aggregates. Divided into: Tlein (Castle Hill) o early phase 3000-1000 BCE archaeological o middle phase, 1000 BCE 1000 CE excavations (McMahan 2002) o late phase, 1000 CE to European contact  Historic period to present

Ib. Native Lifeways (Historic or Proto-Historic) Native Lifeways refers to the traditional ways in which the first known people of the area, the Tlingit, lived. This era represents the late phase of the Prehistoric Period and the early phase of the Historic Period, when the Tlingit began to settle into winter villages, adopt a more sophisticated ground stone and bone technology, and construct defensive fortifications. This is also the era that is most associated with Tlingit place names.

The name Tlingit essentially means human beings. The word was originally used to distinguish a human being from an animal since believed that there was little difference between humans and animals. Over time the word came to be a national name (Benson 2010).

Tlingit society, in common with most of those in the region, was divided into two moieties, or halves, as an essential part of the social structure; among the Tlingit, these are known now as Raven and Eagle. That structure was built around clans, or extended families,

12

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 each headed by an overall leader, with house leaders as the next level. Each clan necessarily fell within one moiety or the other, though since Ravens could only marry Eagles, each clan obviously included members of both. Some clans were large and extended over large parts of the region; others were smaller and were local. The dominant clan in Sitka historically was the Kiks.adi, a Raven clan. Their local Eagle counterpart is the Kaagwaantaan, and a number of smaller clans in both moieties are represented in Sitka.

The Tlingit people lived in winter villages but ventured out during the summer months setting up camps where fishing, hunting, and gathering activities, including processing, took place. These camps were smaller and usually consisted of single extended families. The battle of 1804 with the Russians drove most Tlingit north on Baranof Island, but by 1820 a substantial number of people who had left returned to Sitka and settled in the Sitka Indian Village. Clan houses were built in a Euro-American style, though with an open floor-plan in the style of the traditional Tlingit long houses. The Tlingit people continue to carry out traditional subsistence practices and maintain a rich heritage. Themes of Native Lifeways to further develop include, but are not limited to are: camps, cemeteries, fortifications, fishing technology, isolated finds, occupation sites, resources utilization, rock art, traditional cultural properties, and village sites.

The Tlingit people engaged in warfare with neighboring tribes and among rival clans and villages within the Tlingit society. They were skilled makers and users of weapons, and builders of large and effective fortifications. The village the Russians found in the late 18th century was fortified atop the rocky knob and is now called Castle Hill. The approaches to Sitka Sound were guarded by forts at Halleck Island, St. Lazaria Island, Biorka Island, and other places. The defensive fortification in the Battle of 1804 at Indian River, included fourteen buildings and was surrounded by a palisade and earthworks. It was said to have housed nearly the entire Native Figure 13: Plan of Tlingit fort at Indian River population of Sitka at the time, around 800 men, as drawn by Lisianski 1805. (Alaska Digital women and children. This figure indicates that Archives 2010) Sitka was one of the larger Tlingit villages in the region.

II. Exploration and Settlement As previously noted, Tlingit descendents were the first to explore, migrate, and settle in the Sitka area. Tlingit legends speak of migrations into the area from several possible directions, either from the north as a possible result of the Bering Sea land bridge, or from the southwest, after a maritime journey from the Polynesian islands across the Pacific. Oral traditions hold that the Tlingit came from the head of the rivers. As one story indicates, Nass-aa-geyeil' (Raven from the head of the Nass River) brought light and stars and moon to the world. The Tlingit are unique and unrelated to other tribes around them. They have no linguistic relationship to any other language except for a vague similarity to the Athabaskan language. They do share some cultural

13

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 similarities with the Athabaskan, with whom the Tlingit have interacted and traded with for centuries. There may also be a connection between the Haida and the Tlingit, but this issue is debated. Essentially, the origin of the Tlingit is still being researched (Benson 2010).

Following Chirikov’s unfortunate experience north of Sitka in 1741, the Russians did not return to the area for more than fifty years. In the meantime, the age of European exploration continued, with the fabled Northwest Passage still being sought. The English explorer Captain sailed past Sitka in 1778, on a voyage which eventually took him well into the Bering Sea. He was followed within a few years by his long-time lieutenant, Captain , who did detailed exploration and mapping of much of the coast of Southeastern Alaska. Between 1774 and 1792, Spaniards based in Mexico and California carried out major explorations in Southeastern Alaska and as far west as Prince William Sound. These expeditions were led by men whose names still figure on maps and charts, including Bruno de Hezeta (or Heceta), Juan Francisco Bodega y Quadra, Salvador Fidalgo and . These Spanish mariners left behind many place names though few are still to be found around Sitka. The French explorer La Perouse sailed close in 1786. So far as is known, none of these Europeans ventured far into Sitka Sound, nor did they have recorded contact with the natives. By the time Vancouver ended his last mapping expedition at Port Conclusion on southern Figure 14: Sea Otter, a sketch from Captain Baranof Island in 1794, the Europeans were Cook's journal Voyage to the Pacific Ocean. ca. satisfied that there was no Northwest Passage 1760s (Alaska Digital Archives 2010). south of the Arctic and left Alaska to the Russians.

During this period, the Russians had been expanding their fur trade and settlements farther west in Alaska. In 1795 a Russian merchant named Alexander Alexeievich Baranov, employed by a trading company, reconnoitered Sitka Sound in search of new hunting and trading grounds for sea otter pelts. In 1799, Russian trading operations were consolidated into the Russian American Company, imperially chartered with a monopoly on the fur trade in Alaska. Baranov was made chief manager of this new consolidated venture and lost no time returning to Sitka Sound to establish a trading post. He had desired to establish it on the site of the Tlingit village at Sitka, but the Tlingit inhabitants declined to allow it. Accordingly, he established his post at Redoubt St. Michael, at what is now called Old Sitka or Starrigavan (Russian for ―Old Harbor‖) some seven miles north of Sitka. In June of 1802, the Tlingit attacked and destroyed that post and massacred most of the inhabitants, including a few Russians and more than one hundred hunters and their families. Baranov, who was in Kodiak on business at the time, returned in the late summer of 1804 to negotiate with the Tlingit but was rebuffed. The natives retreated to a fort they had built just east of Sitka, at the mouth of Indian River. After a couple of weeks of shooting between the fort and Russians ships, the Tlingit abandoned their fort and made their

14

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 way to the northeastern shore of Baranof Island, thirty miles away. Eventually they returned to Sitka, but in the meantime the Russians had established their own settlement on the site of the Tlingit village in what is now downtown Sitka.

Baranov’s establishment of Sitka in the fall of 1804 was a necessary step toward the eventual purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867.

After Sitka was well established, a sub-colony was set up at Redoubt Bay, a few miles south, to take advantage of readily available waterpower in order to operate a sawmill and a grist mill to make flour from imported grain. That Bay and adjoining Redoubt Lake are the location of one of the few substantial red salmon runs around Sitka; the Russians salted those fish in casks for their own use and export.

Baranov in 1811 established a colony at Fort Ross in California, with the idea of establishing agriculture to feed the Alaskan colonies. Without much success, the outpost was abandoned in 1841. Sitka remained the only significant Russian outpost east of Kodiak until the transfer to the U.S. in 1867.

European explorers, particularly Vancouver, had done extensive charting and mapping of the coast of Southeast Alaska, and the Russians made detailed charts and maps for their own use. In August of 1867, even before the transfer, the U.S. Revenue Cutter Lincoln brought to Sitka a coastal survey party headed by George Davidson of the U.S. Coast and Figure 15: Magnetic Geodetic Survey. That survey has been followed by extensive mapping Observations being and charting work ever since by that agency and the U.S. Geological made by F. P. Ulrich at Survey and their successor agencies. Sitka in 1929. (USGS 2000) Aside from Sitka and its immediate environs, the only other established community now within the boundaries of the Borough is Baranof, at the head of Warm Springs Bay, directly across Baranof Island from Sitka, on the eastern shore. The hot springs which give the bay its name are located next to a 40-foot-high cascade from Lake O’Neill. The springs were undoubtedly known to the Tlingit and used by them, though signs of settlement have not been found. The first recorded claim at Figure 16: Baranof Warm Springs ca. 1925. (Alaska the site was filed in 1902. Several other Digital Archives 2010) people settled there, and a post office was established in 1907. Within a few more years, a sawmill was operating and a resort with cabins and a hotel building were in operation, catering to people from Juneau. The population in the summer of 1913 was said to be about two hundred. The community seems to have had its ups and downs, and the post office was closed for a time. It reopened in 1917 and remained open

15

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

until 1973, when it was finally closed for good. There were various fish processing operations at Baranof (now short one ―f‖) before World War II, but in 1941, when the U.S. Navy looked at the place for a possible defense-related site, it found twenty houses, mostly vacant, and six residents. It chose another location. At one time in the years after the war, Baranof was known as a wild and place, offering drinking, whoring and fighting to visiting fishermen, but that cultural milieu faded away. A store which operated sporadically finally collapsed into the harbor in the 1990s, and since then there have been few if any year-round residents. The hot springs and the lake still make it a fine place to visit, and there are facilities for summer tourists.

III. Military and Government There was not a Russian military presence as such in Sitka from 1805 until 1855. In 1804 the Navy sloop-of-war was diverted from a round-the-world voyage to Kodiak and thence to Sitka to help reestablish the settlement. The ship’s fourteen cannons played a major role in the Battle of Sitka. Her commander, Lieutenant Yuri Fedorovich Lisianski, took his vessel back to Kodiak that winter but returned to Sitka in 1805 to be sure all was well. Satisfied that it was, he resumed his voyage across the Pacific and ultimately back to St. Petersburg. Later, he published a detailed of the battle in Russian and in his own English translation, which is the only detailed written eyewitness record of those events. During his time in Sitka, Lisianski carried out local explorations, including the first known European visit to Goddard Hot Springs south of Sitka and was the first known European to climb Mount Edgecumbe. Subsequently, the Navy turned the Neva over to the Russian-American Company, who used her to transport goods and passengers from Siberia to Alaska until she was wrecked near Cape Edgecumbe with heavy loss of life in 1813. In 1818 Baranof left Sitka to return to his native Russia, a voyage he did not survive. All subsequent Russian-American Company chief managers or governors until 1867 were Imperial Navy officers.

In the mid-1850s two companies of Russian infantry were sent to Sitka and housed in a barracks built for them near the waterfront. They were stationed here because of the with Britain and France, and not because of tensions with the Tlingit, though it was said that soldiers did get involved in a shooting incident in 1855 which started over stolen firewood (R. N. DeArmond 1995).

During the Russian era, Sitka and Alaska did not have a government as such. The entirety of was a company venture, and Sitka was entirely a company town. Sole civil authority rested with the chief manager and his deputies. There was no judiciary or court system. Russian law prevailed, and those who broke it were dealt with by company officials. The sub-colony at Redoubt Bay seems to have been used to some extent as a penal settlement.

Sovereignty over Alaska changed hands in a military ceremony on Castle Hill on October 18, 1867. The Figure 17: Castle Hill, 1889. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010)

16

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Russian flag came down, the Stars and Stripes went up, documents were signed and exchanged, and Alaska was an American possession.

At the national level after the transfer, there was even less civil government than before, since no provision had been made for it. Power effectively rested with Brevet Major General Jefferson C. Davis, commanding Company F of the U.S. Army 9th Infantry. Davis was a brutal man, a fearsome tactical officer in the Civil War, who had once murdered a superior officer but was kept on duty unpunished because of his military skills. His troops were battle-hardened Civil War veterans, and they treated Sitka and its people like occupied enemy territory, seizing the houses of the inhabitants and brutalizing the residents. Davis soon left, to apply his skills in the Indian Wars, and the troops were withdrawn in 1877, to the relief of Sitkans who had survived their stay. The troop commander had been in effect the only official U.S. authority in Alaska, ordered to protect American life and property, aside from a Collector of Customs, whose duties were limited to collecting revenues from visiting vessels.

After U.S. Army troops left Alaska in the summer of 1877, there was no permanent military presence and little civil authority in Alaska. U.S. Navy vessels and revenue cutters visited frequently, but rarely stayed. The absence of the military became acutely noticeable in early 1879 when white inhabitants of Sitka, feeling threatened by the Tlingit, sent to Victoria, , for assistance. The British were happy to oblige, sending the formidable steam frigate HMS Osprey to Sitka to provide protection. Ultimately, there was no uprising, and whether there Figure 18: U.S.S. Pinta. 1886. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) had ever been any real threat of one is unclear. From then on there was a regular military presence in Sitka, right up to the present. Until well into the 20th century, this presence was generally in the form of a Navy vessel stationed in Sitka. After 1904 and into the 1960s there was also a regular Army Signal Corps detachment stationed locally. Vessels of the U.S. Revenue Cutter Service and Lighthouse Service began visiting Sitka even before the transfer, and after those agencies and others were combined into the U.S. Coast Guard in the early 20th century, its vessels were regular callers. The Coast Guard did extensive patrolling in southeastern Alaska waters during World War II, and after the war a buoy tender was stationed here to maintain aids to navigation as well as carry out maritime safety and patrol duties. A buoy tender continues to be stationed here. The Coast Guard Air Station Sitka was commissioned in 1977 and continues search and rescue and patrol duties. The Coast Guard is a major government civilian employer.

In 1904 the U.S. military laid a submarine telegraph cable into Sitka from ; this marked the first time Sitka had been connected to the outside world by any means other than by sea. The cable was operated by the U.S. Army Signal Corps, and though primarily for military use, it seems to have brought some civilian news and traffic into town as well. The Cable House that marked the end of the telecommunications line now houses the local public radio station KCAW.

17

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

A U.S. Marine Corps detachment was stationed at Sitka from 1892 until 1912, with a barracks downtown which became the first Alaska Pioneers’ Home in 1913.

In the mid-1930s U.S. strategic planning focused on the perceived threat from the Japanese Empire, and for wartime preparation, Naval sea and air bases were planned for Sitka, Kodiak and Unalaska/Dutch Harbor. Work was started first on the Sitka base in 1937, and was largely completed by the time of Pearl Harbor in December, 1941. That event and the Japanese attacks and invasion in the a few months later, led to Alaska being declared a War Zone, effectively under Figure 20: WWII military build-up on military command for the duration of the war. Thousands Japonski Island, ca. 1940's. (Alaska of Army and Navy men came to Sitka, with civilian Digital Archives 2010) contractors, in building and operating what became the Figure 19: Naval Air Station Sitka. As many as 10,000 men were Former U.S. stationed here at one time. Since this came at a time when Naval Mess Hall the civilian population of Sitka was not much over 1,000, and Bakery now Mt. Edgecumbe the influx had a profound effect on the community, which H.S. cafeteria. endured long after the war was over. The topography of (Alaska DNR Japonski Island and neighboring small islands were 1980) drastically changed by military construction which continue to be in use, many facilitate Mt. Edgecumbe High School.

At the local level and in the absence of any constituted civil authority, a public meeting was held in Sitka three weeks after the transfer to begin drafting a charter and local laws for a municipal government. On November 25, 1867, Sitka’s first election was held to choose a mayor, five council members, a recorder and a surveyor, all for one-year terms. This government continued to function until the Organic Act of 1884 made provision for civil governments in the .

The continued to maintain schools for Orthodox children after the transfer. In March of 1869 the city council appointed a three-member school board to prepare a school building, hire a teacher, and oversee operations of the ―English‖ school to distinguish it from the Russian ones.

After the 1884 Organic Act went into effect, John Kinkead, a Nevadan who had earlier lived in Sitka, was appointed Governor of the District of Alaska, with seat of government at Sitka. An amended Act in 1900 provided for the seat of government to be moved to Juneau, though that move was not completed until 1906. After Alaska was made a U.S. Territory in 1912, with provision for incorporated city governments with limited taxation and regulatory powers, Sitka was incorporated as a Second Class City. In the 1920s that status was upgraded to First Class City, with more municipal powers. That status continued until after statehood in 1959. The Borough of Sitka, with a limited government headed by a Borough Chairman, was adopted in 1963, putting the town in the position of having two parallel governing bodies. The City and

18

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Borough were unified in late 1971 and have functioned smoothly in that status since. (R. N. DeArmond 1995).

For the Tlingit people, the Treaty of Cession (1867) referred to the indigenous people of Alaska as "uncivilized tribes." Such designation in legislation and other agreements caused to be subject to the same regulations and policies as American Indians in the United States. Statements by the Office of the Solicitor in the U.S. Department of Interior in 1932 further supported the federal government's treatment of Alaska Natives as American Indians.

As a result of non-Indian occupation, Sitka people found themselves mostly congregated into one area of town, to the northwest of the Russian Church and governmental center. This locality became known as the Sitka Indian Village or Native Village (D. D. Theodoratus 1995).

By the turn of the century, the Tlingit people felt themselves threatened politically, territorially, culturally, and socially. In response, the Tlingit Figure 21: Figure 4. Sitka Indian Village ca. people organized the Alaska Native Brotherhood 1920’s with sealers in foreground. Merrill (ANB). The ANB was founded in Juneau in 1912 by a Photo No. 80 (Theodoratus, 1995) group of Native men, mostly Tlingit and mostly from Sitka. The first local chapter, Camp No. 1, was established here soon after. The ANB was modeled closely on the fraternal organizations that were a major factor in American society at the time. Its goals were to gain equality for the Native people of Southeast Alaska and to obtain for them the same citizenship and education rights as non-Natives. In 1915, due to the efforts of the ANB (and the newly organized Alaska Native Sisterhood), the territorial legislature adopted a position similar to the Dawes Act to allow Natives to become citizens, provided that the Natives became "civilized" by rejecting certain tribal customs and relationships. As a result, few Native people became citizens at this time; most did not become American citizens until the U.S. Congress adopted the Citizenship Act of 1924.

The March 3, 1891 Act created the Townsite of Sitka and included the Sitka Native Village. These city and borough boundaries are still used today (Figure 22). On May 25, 1926, the Native Townsite Act was passed. Congress enacted this legislation because the Alaska Natives had been excluded from the 1891 Townsite Act. The Act of 1926 provided an opportunity for Natives "to obtain title to lands withdrawn from public domain." Natives and non-Natives were eligible to obtain deeds for lots within subdivided portions and occupy unsubdivided lands of the same townsite. However, Natives were issued ―restricted‖ deeds which limited their ability to sell their property (UAA-ISER 1998-2004). Today there are still a few of Figure 22: U.S. Survey 1474 these restricted deeds in the Sitka Indian Village and are still originally completed in 1923 managed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. (Alaska Department of Natural Resources 2010)

19

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Tlingit people also actively pursued the right to vote. Unlike many Alaska Native people at the time who wanted to continue living as they had for many generations, Tlingit leaders sought increased political power. In 1924, William Paul, a Tlingit, won election to the Territorial House of Representatives, marking the beginning of a trend toward Native political power.

In 1929 the ANB began campaigning on land issues, and as a result Congress passed a law in 1935 allowing Tlingits and Haidas to sue the United States for the loss of their lands. By this time large sections of Tlingit country had become the Tongass National Forest. Glacier Bay had become a National Monument, and further south in Tlingit country, Annette Island was set aside as a reservation for Tsimpsian Indians. In 1959—the same year that Alaska was admitted as a state—the U.S. Court of Claims decided in favor of the Tlingit and Haida for payment for land that was taken from them. These land claims involved 16 million acres without a defined monetary value; an actual settlement took years to conclude. In 1971, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) was passed, which called for the settlement of all claims against the United States and the state of Alaska that are based on aboriginal right, title, use, or occupancy of land or water areas in Alaska.

Tlingit individuals did not receive title to lands as a result of ANCSA. Instead, lands claimed by southeast Natives under this act were placed under the control of the ANCSA-established thirteen regional corporations, Sealaska, and the ANCSA- established village corporations, locally known as Shee Atika Corporation. Some village corporations had the option to provide individuals with land in some cases, but most villages designated the land for future development. Figure 23: BLM/ANCSA meetings, ANB Hall, Sitka, April Their no question that discrimination against the Native people 11, 1975. among the white population existed from the time of the transfer in 1867, and issues of Native citizenship, their right to vote, fishing and fish trap disputes, and the provisions of ANCSA contributed to tensions in the 20th century. The Alaska Native Brotherhood did much to fight these prejudices and elevate the social status of the Tlingit and as American citizens (Benson 2010).

The Sitka Tribe of Alaska, formerly Sitka Community Association, is a federally-recognized tribal government, organized by corporate charter as a federal corporation, as ratified in 1938 under The Department of the Interior by provision of the Indian Reorganization Act (June 18, 1934, 48 Stat. 984; May 1, 1936, 49 Stat. 1250). According to the constitution and by-laws, the purpose of the charter of incorporation is to ―further the economic development of the Indians residing in the neighborhood of Sitka, Alaska‖. The majorities of Sitka Tribal members are Tlingit in descent and include members from the communities of Kake, Hoonah, Angoon, and Yakutat; the membership also includes Haida and Tsimpsian descendents. Today the Tribe has approximately 4000 members.

20

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

IV. Commerce and Economic Development The Tlingit Natives conducted extensive trade among themselves and with neighboring tribes in Alaska and Canada. Traditional Tlingit trade routes went up river valleys, such as the Taku, Stikine, and Alsek, and over mountain passes into the interior. A wise trader always included an elderly woman to act as bargainer and to keep track of exchange values (Benson 2010).

From the interior came hides, fine moccasins, birch wood bows, and copper ore. Brought from the coast were cedar baskets, fish oil, shells, and smoked seafoods. Like all activities, trading had religious aspects. Traders had to prepare by fasting, consulting a shaman, and then hosting a feast.

Tlingit also traded among themselves. For example, to island peoples, men and women from mainland Tlingit villages traded rabbit or marmot skin blankets, moose hide shirts, skin trousers with feet, dressed hides, cranberries in oil, pressed strawberry cakes, candlefish oil, horn spoons, woven blankets, and spruce root baskets. In return, islanders gave sea otter pelts, dried venison, seal oil, dried halibut, salmon, and herring, dried seaweed, clams, mussels, sea urchins, herring roe spawn, cedar bark baskets, greenstone, and yew wood from southern Southeast Alaska islands. Figure 24: Dryng herring spawn, 1915. (University of Washington 2010)

A major trade item between the Tlingit of northern and southern Southeast Alaska was red cedar logs, particularly for construction of canoes. The northern limit of Western Red Cedar growth is a line from the north end of Prince of Wales to the mainland in the Wrangell area. North of that line no wood is suitable for carving canoes or totem poles. The Haida and the Tlingit who had access to red cedar also sold finished canoes to their northern neighbors. The large Haida and Tlingit canoes, from forty to over sixty feet long, were magnificently seaworthy vessels, capable of long voyages under paddle and sail. However, they were difficult to build and once built were very fragile. Once Native builders had learned European-style rib and plank boat construction, they largely abandoned building of large canoes, though some continued to be used into the early 20th century.

Tlingit profits from the interior increased during the fur trade era, when everyone inland wanted manufactured goods, such as guns, powder, shot, hardtack, flour, rice, beans, pants, shirts, yard goods, blankets, tobacco, molasses, steel traps, knives, hatchets, needles and thread, paint, and jewelry. Natives quickly learned to use tea to dye red fox skins to look like more valuable pelts. Fierce international competition encouraged such tricks. When the Russians tried to use dentalia as a kind of money, the Spanish and Americans glutted the market by bringing many of these shells up from California (Miller n.d.). Still today herring roe from Sitka Sound is traded to the people of the Haines/Klukwan area for oil from the eulachon (candlefish) which spawn in that area in great numbers.

21

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

The focus of Russian settlement in Alaska was always the fur trade, mostly the sale of sea otter pelts to China. The return trade was mostly in the form of tea, highly valued in the colonies as well as at home. The camphorwood chests in which the tea was shipped from China became highly-valued trade items; they were used for storage of precious items and sometimes, in larger sizes, even for coffins. Contrary to widespread belief, the Russians did not wipe out the sea otter population of Southeastern Alaska. That was efficiently accomplished by the Americans within a few years of the transfer (W. DeArmond 2010). The fur trade was a monopoly of the Russians, who had an incentive to practice some degree of conservation, and did so, by rotating hunting areas to allow populations to rebuild. However, as the fur trade waned with changing fashion and the effects of years of hunting on the overall sea otter populations, the Russian American Company branched into exports of lumber, fish, and starting in the 1840s, metal goods and ice to California. The company had the only iron foundries on the West Coast – using pig iron shipped from Russia as ballast in company ships – and did a good business in picks and shovels and gold pans to the Forty-Niners. The ice trade involved shipping ice cut from Swan Lake and perhaps Redoubt Lake, packed in sawdust in the holds of sailing vessels, to San Francisco where, unlikely as it may seem, at least some of it arrived in solid form. Much of that trade shifted to Kodiak as a result of warm winters in the Sitka area in the Figure 25: Chinese 1850s. It was continued after the transfer by the confusingly named and Tea Brick, 1891. U.S.-owned American-Russian Company.

Gold discoveries in western Canada in the 1870s and at Juneau in 1880 set off a lot of prospecting and some activity around Sitka. In Sitka area, small amounts of gold and silver were found, but some fairly large-scaled mining operations failed. Some of these, even if they did not start out as scams to bilk investors, eventually turned out that way. The Lucky Chance Mine was first staked in 1874 and went through a succession of owners to 1904. By 1885, it was developed by a 25-foot shaft and a 30-foot drift. By 1887, the property Figure 26: Lucky Chance Mine, Sitka, n.d. had a 5-stamp mill and 60 tons of ore was (University of Washington 2010) produced from two adits (mine entrances). By 1904, there was a 10-stamp mill, a sawmill, and a waterpower generator, and about 1,200 tons of ore had been produced above the main adit which was called the No. 2 Tunnel. A 3,000- to 4,000-foot tram was built from the mouth of this adit to the mill below and a corduroy road was built to the mine from the head of Silver Bay. The property was under new ownership in 1940 but most of the development and production probably took place before the early 1900's. Early in the 20th century gold was found in substantial quantities on the southwestern part of Chichagof Island, not far north of Sitka, and large-scale and profitable mining continued into the 1940s.

Shipbuilding by the Russians commenced at Sitka soon after the town was established, and continued until 1867. In addition to sailing and steam vessels for company use, vessels of

22

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

varying sizes were also built for sale. A shipyard with a marine ways was constructed on the waterfront at the present site of Totem Square; it was the only marine ways in the Pacific Northwest capable of hauling out the famed Hudson’s Bay Company steamer Beaver, which was extensively repaired and rebuilt there in the early 1850s. The first steamship actually built on the Pacific Coast, the Nikolai I, was built at the Sitka yard in the late 1830s. The Nikolai I had an American-made single-cylinder steam engine, which later powered two other Russian vessels. However, by the early 1840s steam engines were being locally fabricated.

From the time of the Purchase onward, boat-building was carried on at Sitka, including the construction of commercial fishing vessels. Boatbuilding was taught to Native pupils at the Sheldon Jackson School, and a number of small craft and vessels were constructed there before World War II. In modern times, Allen Marine has fabricated vessels at Sitka, mostly aluminum catamarans, for use in that firm’s own tourist business and for sale as far away as the U.S. east coast. Smaller local operations build Figure 27: Students in Peter Simpson's aluminum small craft, and there are haulout facilities for boat shop. ca. 1890 (Sitka Tribal work on commercial and private vessels. Library 2010)

The Russians made repeated but fruitless attempts to grow grain in Sitka, although attempts to grow root vegetables were somewhat more successful, and extensive vegetable gardens were maintained at Sitka. The Russians here also introduced agriculture to the Tlingit people in the form of potato farming with crops being sold as well as used by the growers.

In 1898, the U.S. Department of Agriculture was ordered to establish a system of agricultural experimental stations in Alaska with headquarters at Sitka. The station was established on a federal reserve on the northeast side of town, where extensive plantings were carried out. By the 1920s it was clear that Sitka was not a suitable place for commercial agriculture, and the station was closed. However, the Sitka rose and many varieties of vegetables, berries, trees, and ornamental plants introduced by the experimental station continue to thrive in local gardens, and on the grounds of the former station, now the site of the Figure 28: Ag. Station Sitka, 1914. U.S.G.S. magnetic and seismic observatory. (University of Washington 2010)

Aside from hunting sea otters and fur seals and some land animals for their pelts, the Russians salted sea lion flesh for winter use. For meat, they depended heavily on venison brought in by Tlingit hunters. Oxen were used locally for draft purposes, but fresh beef did not become a significant part of the local diet. Salmon and herring were salted in casks, and there was some trade in these commodities with California and Hawaii, and perhaps with Central and South America. Much of the actual fishing was carried out by skilled Native people. The Tlingit used hook and line, mostly for halibut, as well as cedar bark nets, weirs, and in-stream cage traps for

23

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

catching salmon. Herring were caught with rakes and dipnets; the roe was collected from kelp and from hemlock branches placed in the water for that purpose. The Russian-American Company usually had a whaling vessel operating in the North Pacific, mostly to provide oil for the lamps of Sitka. Commercial whaling out of Sitka did not exist but, whaling was carried in the early 20th century on a fairly large scale from Port Armstrong on the southeastern side of Baranof Island, as it was from other points Figure 29: Tlingit Fish Traps. on the eastern side of . (Emmons and De Laguna 1991)

After the U.S. Purchase, fishing at Sitka was mostly at subsistence level. A salmon cannery, one of the first two in Alaska, was established at Old Sitka in 1878, but could not obtain enough red salmon for a paying pack and was abandoned after two seasons. Commercial canning operations resumed in Sitka in 1918 with construction of the Pyramid Packing Cannery, whose building still stands on Katlian Street. It obtained fish from purse seiners and from the only three salmon traps located within what is now the Sitka Borough in the Salisbury Sound Figure 30: Herring Fishing, area. When salmon traps were outlawed at the time of statehood 1928. (Alaska Digital Archives in 1959, the cannery closed like many others in Alaska. 2010)

In other parts of Southeastern Alaska there were large commercial herring fisheries, but this was never the case at Sitka; the spawning fish here were not suitable either for packing for food or for reduction into fish meal and oil. Herring fishing in Sitka Sound was for subsistence and for bait until the modern sac roe fishery began in 1975. It continues as a multi-million-dollar industry. In the first decade of the 20th centrury, there were a large number of commercial herring fisheries based on the Chatham Strait side of Baranof Island. These packed herring for food, both salted in casks and canned. A cannery for herring and salmon at Little Port Walter was for a time around the end of the largest cannery in Southeastern Alaska. A large fleet of purse seine vessels caught the herring. Most of those fish, however, rather than being used for food, went into reduction plants, so called because they used heat to reduce the herring to oil and fish meal. It was said that a herring reduction plant could be smelled at least 20 miles downwind, and the tourist steamers of the day stayed well away from them.

The troll fishery for king and coho salmon gradually moved north from southern Southeastern Alaska over the first third of the 20th century, and was well established here by the 1920s. Some of those fish, particularly cohos, were exported frozen, but the main use for troll-caught king salmon was and has been for the mild Figure 31: Sitkoh Bay Cannery, cure pack, in which the fish are cleaned, split, and salted in large ca. 1910. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) casks. In modern times many kings are exported fresh or frozen for the restaurant trade.

24

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Sitka became a major port for halibut fishing after establishment of the Booth Fisheries Company cold storage in 1913, just north of present-day Totem Square. It not only could buy and freeze the catch, but could provide the long-line vessels with the ice that was vital for their extended trips. It became the Sitka Cold Storage in 1931, and continued in operation until the plant burned in 1973. It was not rebuilt.

Aside from the historical fisheries for salmon, halibut, and herring, in the post-World War II era commercial fishing for sablefish (black cod), various species of crab, and shellfish have been carried on from Sitka.

As noted, the main Russian interest was in sea otters, but their Native hunters also did pelagic hunting for northern fur seals, which traveled close to Sitka on their annual migrations between southern California waters and the Pribilof Islands in the Bering Sea. Large-scale and unregulated pelagic sealing after the U.S. Purchase by the end of the 19th century threatened to wipe out the fur seals completely, as it had very nearly done for the sea otters, until an international agreement outlawed most sealing. The U.S. government took over the fur seal breeding grounds in the Pribilofs and maintained a monopoly for many years on the pelts. Alaska Natives were allowed to pursue pelagic sealing from vessels powered by oars or sail and in the early part of the 20th century such sealing was carried out from Sitka. A special type of boat, the Sitka Sealer, on whaleboat lines, twenty to twenty four feet long and propelled by several oarsmen, was developed to take hunters out to where the seals passed by on the outside of Biorka Island. World War II and the accompanying economic dislocations put an end to the market for fur seal pelts, and sealing out of Sitka never resumed. After the restoration of sea otter populations in the area starting in the 1960s, Natives were allowed to take those animals for their furs, with the pelts to be processed before sale. This trade continues.

After the Purchase, there was some commercial trapping for mink and other local furbearers around Sitka. In the second decade of the 20th century, the U.S. government began promoting fur farming as a worthwhile economic activity in suitable areas, and the fox farming era in Southeastern Alaska began. There was also some farming of mink, but those animals had to be kept in pens, from which they were expert at escaping and, of course, could and did swim. The many small islands of Southeastern Alaska provided excellent sites for fox farms since those animals declined to venture into salt water. By 1917 the U.S. Forest Service was leasing islands to fur farmers for $25 a year, and many farms were established on islands in Sitka Sound and elsewhere in the area, including . Some of these were fairly large-scale operations backed by local and outside businesses. At one point in Figure 32: Goddard Hot Springs, ca. 1920. (Alaska Digital the 1920s, a school was established at Archives 2010)

25

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Goddard Hot Springs south of Sitka for children from the fox farming islands, who were taken back and forth to school by boat. Though profits could be good, fox farming was a chancy business, subject to the vagaries of the market and the weather in which warm winters made poor pelts, various diseases, and the attention of predators. Bald eagles developed a taste for fox kits leading fox farmers to lobby hard for the bounty on those birds in Alaska until well after World War II.

It happened that the fox farming era in Alaska coincided with national Prohibition and a lot of fox farms were at least to some degree covers for moonshining operations. There was a standing joke in Sitka about the large quantities of grain, molasses, and sugar shipped in, supposedly for the consumption of the foxes. Of course Sitkans were as thirsty as any other Americans in the Prohibition era and rumrunning was a lucrative operation for a number of local men with fast boats, supplementing what could be produced locally with imports from Canada. The Great Depression and the repeal of Prohibition in 1933 ended the moonshining and rumrunning trades and shut down most of the fur farming operations. A few hung on into the 1940s.

News of the purchase of Alaska by the U.S. in 1867 brought an influx of would-be settlers and traders from the U.S. and Canada, mostly attracted by the sale of the inventory of the Russian- American Company. This included buildings, land and ships, as well as supplies, trade goods of all sorts, construction materials, and other merchandise. Some of these people established businesses, including a brewery and other cultural institutions, but most of them soon enough discovered that the population of Sitka was small and poor and the commercial opportunities were distinctly limited, and moved on.

The Russians operated water and later steam-powered sawmills at Sitka and exported some Sitka spruce and Alaska yellow cedar lumber to California and perhaps farther. Various small and medium-sized sawmill operations produced lumber for local construction use and for fish box shooks until the 1950s. However, Douglas fir from farther down the West Coast was still regarded as superior construction material, and a lot of that was imported for local building. The local timber industry increased drastically

Figure 33: Mill worker in Sitka. when the Alaska Lumber and Pulp Company opened its pulp n.d. (University of Washington operation at Saw Mill Creek 1959. The Japanese-owned mill 2010) offered hundreds of jobs on site and many more in logging operations around the region, producing high-grade dissolving pulp for the Japanese market. The mill was able to operate only because of what amounted to subsidized timber production from the Tongass National Forest. Political changes, evolution of the pulp market, and increasing obsolescence of the plant forced it to close in 1993. This was a major blow to Sitka’s economy, but it recovered better than did such communities as Ketchikan and Wrangell in the face of comparable closures. Health care, education, commercial fishing and fish processing, tourism and government continue to provide the bases of the local economy in the aftermath of the pulp mill era.

26

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

V. Transportation and Communication Sitka has always looked to the sea. The Tlingit were people of the sea and its edge, and rarely ventured very far inland. They had routes for canoe travel throughout the Southeastern Alaska region, with aids to navigation in the form of markers on shore. The location of Sitka Sound on the outer coast was ideal for the Russians. Vessels coming east from Kamchatka or northeast from the Indian Ocean easily reached Sitka Sound. The location was much less attractive after the American Purchase, and especially after the Cassiar of the 1870s, the discovery of gold at Juneau in 1880, and the of 1897. Those events brought Figure 35: Ships anchored in Sitka Harbor. ca. 1890. (Alaska Digital Archives commercial ship traffic up the from 2010) Puget Sound, as steam power and the building of lighthouses and other aids to navigation made that hazardous route practical. Sitka soon found itself off the main route, and it has remained there since. Even though the U.S. Government was neglectful of Alaska after the purchase, it did ensure that mail service was provided to the new possession, mostly by sea. Commercial freight and passenger steamship service was well established by the 1880s and included Sitka to some extent until the mid-1950s, when it could no longer compete with tug-and-barge and air service. For a few years, until the Alaska Marine Highway System established ferry service beginning in 1963, Sitka had to rely on tug-and-barge for freight and small amphibious aircraft or small private vessels for passenger travel. In the late 1920s and the 1930s, commercial aviation into Sitka existed, but that was interrupted by the war, and only became well established in the late 1940s. Until the 1960s the only commercial airports in the region were at Juneau and Ketchikan; Sitka was connected to these places by amphibious aircraft carrying up to twenty four passengers. Construction of the Sitka Airport on Japonski Island in the mid-1960s for the first time allowed large-scale commercial air service for passengers and freight. At that time travel across the narrow Sitka Channel between town and Japonski Island was by boat; small ferry craft, the so-called shore boats, former Navy Figure 34: Shoreboat “Dorothy”. ca. launches, provided cross-channel service until the 1950 (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) O’Connell Bridge was opened in 1972.

Submarine cable telegraph service to Sitka began in 1904, though the system carried mostly military traffic. Private telephones were in use here as early as the 1880s, but there was no real network until the Sitka Telephone Company was established in early 1939, with sixty five subscribers. Long distance phone service did not become available until 1947; it relied then and for quite some years afterward on short wave radio links, which were not notably reliable. Service eventually improved after undersea telephone cables and satellite relays came into being.

Military personnel set up an informal and unofficial radio broadcast station in 1943. After the war in 1947, a couple of local men obtained the equipment from that station and set up a small

27

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 commercial broadcasting operation, with the call letters KBW, but it was not successful. KIFW went on the air in late 1949 and is still operating. Community radio station KCAW began operation in 1982. Commercial over-the-air television began in 1959 and has since been supplemented by cable and satellite TV.

VI. Intellectual and Social Institutions Spiritual life in Sitka began with the Tlingit. The Russian-American Company brought with its establishment the Russian Orthodox Church, as provided for in the company’s charter from the Czar. An Orthodox priest accompanied the Bering-Chirikov expedition in 1741 and held services at sea off Alaska. Churches were established in western Alaska by the 1780s. The first church at Sitka, St. Michael’s was built in 1816 and replaced in the early 1830s by a new church on the same site. It in turn was replaced by St. Michael’s Cathedral, consecrated in 1848. The old church was demolished about 1852 to allow construction of Building 29, partly on the same site.

In 1840 the sizable Lutheran contingent among the Russian American population was allowed to establish a church, with a pastor brought from Finland though the Lutherans were not allowed to proselytize or to seek convicts among the Native people. The Tlingit were not notably enthused about Russian religion until a smallpox outbreak in the mid-1830s had a devastating effect on their community. The Russians had vaccine which was made available to the Tlingit by the Orthodox Priest Ivan Veniaminov, who soon won converts. In the late 1840s he had built a church for the Tlingit on the boundary between the Tlingit village and the Russian settlement. Large numbers of Tlingit people are still Orthodox congregants; it is worth noting that most of the conversions to that faith took place after the U.S. Purchase in 1867 when American Protestant missionaries came to the region. The Presbyterian Church soon established itself in Sitka and was followed in due time by Roman Catholic and Episcopalian Churches. The Episcopalian Church, St. Peter’s-by-the-Sea on eastern Lincoln Street, was built in 1899 and is a Sitka landmark. The only other remaining church building of an historical note is the Roman Catholic St. Gregory’s on Baranof Street originally established in 1885 . In 1922 a new structure was built on the same site and eventually replaced by a new church nearby in 1963. A number of Jews were among the settlers who came to Sitka at the time of the transfer and thus there has been a Jewish presence with occasional religious observances since, though no establishment of a synagogue or formal congregation.

The various religions founded cemeteries about Sitka. Record keeping has been variable in quality, and no doubt there are plenty of unmarked and unrecorded graves. The Army established a cemetery on a small hill northeast of downtown Sitka shortly after the transfer. It became known as the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Cemetery; the area surrounding it was made a federal reserve in 1890. The site was made an official National Cemetery in 1925, a status Figure 36: See House and St. Peters Episcopal Church, it continues to hold. 1914. (University of Washington 2010)

28

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

At the time of the Purchase, Sitka looked very much like a Siberian village of the time; most of the architecture was of solid, serviceable, log structures, which many survived into the 20th century. An exception to the solid and serviceable description is provided by the gracefully-proportioned and detailed St. Michael’s Cathedral, designed by Bishop Innokentii. After the Purchase of Alaska, architecture tended toward the American Vernacular. An example of this style still remaining is the Columbia Bar on Lincoln Street. It was built soon after the Figure 37: Russian Orthodox Cemetery. nd. (University of transfer and is thus the oldest American building in Sitka. It was Washington 2010) originally built as a butcher shop and has had many uses over the years.

After the Purchase in 1867 and the establishment of an American population, interest in local human and natural history led to the founding of societies dedicated to those fields. In the late 19th century, the Alaskan Society of Natural History and Ethnology was active in Sitka and in 1900 carried out investigations of the site of the fortified Tlingit settlement on Halleck Island north of town. Local amateur archaeologists investigated the Old Sitka site in the 1930s and uncovered the only Russian possession plaque, one of 20 placed that has been found. Local historical societies were active during the first half of the 20th century, and the present Sitka Historical Society was formed in 1957. Figure 38 Beach before construction of Crescent Harbor in the mid- Among its purposes was the establishment of a local 1960s. historical museum now is housed in Harrigan Centennial (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) Hall, built to commemorate the centennial in 1967. More recently, the Cape Decision Lighthouse Society and the Sitka Maritime Heritage Society have been established to further historical preservation and research in their respective areas.

Sheldon Jackson, the Presbyterian missionary and education agent, was a prolific collector of Native artifacts from all over Alaska. He established a museum for his collection on the grounds of the Sheldon Jackson School in the 1880s. In 1895 he built an octagonal concrete building to house the collections, it is the first concrete structure and the oldest museum in Alaska which contains a premier collection of ethnographic artifacts. The museum and its contents were purchased from the school by the State of Alaska in the early 1980s and made a part of the state Figure 39: Sheldon Jackson School, museum system, which continues to operate it. 1913. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010)

29

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

In 1890, President Benjamin Harrison set aside land for a number of federal reserves at Sitka, including a tract of some fifty acres at the mouth of Indian River as a public park; it included the sites of the Tlingit fort and the Battle of 1804. In 1910 the park was made the Sitka National Monument, specifically to commemorate the battle, the graves of Russians killed there, the fort, and the totem poles which had been brought to Sitka from southern Southeastern Alaska early in 20th century. It is thus the oldest – and still smallest – part of the National Park system in Alaska. A modern visitor center with a small museum was built in 1965. In 1972 the National Park Service purchased the Russian Bishop’s House on Figure 40: Lover's Lane, Sitka National Lincoln Street from the Orthodox Church. That log Historical Park, ca. 1890-1920. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) structure, built in 1842-43 as a residence for Innokentii, the first Russian Orthodox Bishop of Alaska, was fully restored over the next sixteen years, and has been open to the public since 1988. It consists of a museum on the ground floor and a restored bishops’ living quarters and chapel on the second floor. With that acquisition, the name of the National Monument was changed to Sitka National Historical Park. The State of Alaska manages parks at Old Sitka, Castle Hill, and the recent Fort Rousseau Causeway on the seaward side of Japonski Island, which includes World War II-era installations.

For much of Sitka’s history, music, like art and theater, was locally developed. Traveling musicians and small theater companies occasionally appeared in town after the steamship era began, and judging by newspaper accounts were enthusiastically received. During World War II, USO shows came to Sitka and provided local people, as well as military personnel, a taste of professional entertainment. In the late 1940s, a publicly-supported series called the Alaska Music Trail began bringing classical musicians to Alaskan cities, including Sitka. It continued into the 1970s, and helped provide the basis for establishment of the Sitka Summer Music Festival in 1972, a premier chamber music venue. Such groups as Sitka Folk and private clubs bring popular music performers to town today.

Public schools were established in Sitka soon after the transfer. These supplemented the schools run by the Russian Orthodox Church into the 1920s, which taught boys and girls in separate classrooms. Presbyterian missionaries opened a school for Native children in 1878. It evolved into the Sitka Industrial Training School and eventually into the Sheldon Jackson School, named for the missionary leader who served as U.S. General Agent for Education in Alaska in the late 19th century. That school in time became a boarding high school and a two-year college, and finally a four-year college, which closed its doors in 2007. The Sheldon Jackson School in its various manifestations has played an important role in the education of generations of Tlingit and other Alaska Native people.

The Mount Edgecumbe School was established by the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs in former military buildings on Japonski Island soon after World War II as a boarding high school for Native children from all over Alaska. It was taken over in the 1980s by the State of Alaska,

30

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 which continues to operate it; it is now open to all Alaska pupils though most of the student body is rural and Native.

The Sitka Community College was established in 1961 and opened for classes the following year in a former public school building on Katlian Street, near the Pioneers’ Home. It changed locations several times and became a part of the University of Alaska Southeast in 1987 with a campus on Japonski Island.

The Sitka Native Education Program began in September of 1974 as a non-profit organization under the name of the Alaska Native Brotherhood Education Program. It was and still is funded by the Indian Education Act title IX. The main components of the program were cultural and tutoring in nature and are housed at the ANB Hall (Sitka Native Education Program 2006).

The Russian-American Company offered health care to its employees and their families with a hospital and doctors along with pensions and retirement provisions. After the U.S. Purchase, health care became more haphazard for many years; military doctors provided some care to the civilian population. Later there was usually at least one civilian doctor in town. The first Alaska Territorial Legislature met at Juneau in 1913. Among the actions was the establishment of the Alaska Pioneers’ Home at Sitka, to provide a place where aged and indigent miners and prospectors could live out their lives in comfort and with Figure 41: Sitka Pioneer Home, 1940. medical care. In the days before Social Security, very few (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) men other than war veterans had pensions, and many old gold rush miner were indigent and unable to work. The Home was originally set up in the former Marine Corps barracks, and in 1934 a large new building was dedicated, a major New Deal project for Sitka. At times in the 1930s it housed some 250 men. It was not until the 1950s that women were admitted for the first time and a wing was added to the Home in 1956. In the meantime, several additional Pioneers’ Homes were built in other parts of Alaska. The Sitka Home now houses fewer than 100 elders.

The Pioneers’ Home had a doctor on staff after it opened in 1913. The infirmaries at the Home and at functioned as hospitalities facilities in Sitka until the World War II era. Public Health Service doctors and nurses were stationed in Sitka and often did double duty at the Home. The first community hospital was established in 1949 in the former Sheldon Jackson infirmary building, now the Tilly Paul Manor, which was subsequently replaced in the 1960s by a new building on the north side of town now known as the present Sitka Community Hospital.

31

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Mount Edgecumbe Hospital was established by the Bureau of Indian Affairs Alaska Native Service as a tuberculosis sanitarium after World War II in a former Navy hospital and other military buildings on Japonski Island. It is now operated in an expanded and modernized main building with satellite structures under contract to the Indian Health Service by the Southeast Alaska Figure 42: Mt. Edgecumbe Regional Health Consortium (SEARHC). Hostital. ca. 1950. (Alaska Digital Archives 2010) The hot springs at Goddard, some 15 miles south of Sitka, were known to the Tlingit, and were known to the Russians at least by the time of the establishment of Sitka in 1804-05. At one time the Russian-American Company maintained a small sanatorium and hospital there. The springs were used by Sitkans after the Purchase, and around 1905 Dr. F.L. Goddard, a local physician and businessman, established a health resort. It was patronized mostly by miners from interior Alaska looking for a warm place to spend the winter. A small settlement rooted there around the resort hotel and a post office (Goddard) was operational from 1908 until 1944. The resort was used by the Pioneers’ Home at Sitka during the 1930s and 1940s. The buildings were mostly gone by the 1950s, but the springs are still used by Sitkans.

The Russians established a magnetic observatory at Sitka to maintain accurate compass settings for company vessels and visiting ships. They also kept detailed weather records which are still useful. Russian scientists also carried out extensive research on the natural history of the area. After the American Purchase, magnetic and seismic observatories were established by the U.S. government, and are still functioning. Federal agencies, the University of Alaska system, and Sheldon Jackson College all have carried out fisheries and other scientific research.

In the Russian period, social life centered on the Company and the Church for which the many religious holidays all were celebrated. After the American Purchase, assorted fraternal and other social organizations operated in Sitka. Some of these were boosted by the effects of World War II. Postwar, a wide array of civic organizations, such as the American Legion and the Moose Lodge, came into being and still operate. Amateur sports leagues, particularly baseball and later basketball, existed by the 19th century and are still popular. Hunting, sport fishing, hiking, and other outdoor recreation flourish, summer and winter. Scouting and other youth organizations established camps early in the 20th century. The Civilian Conservation Corps built shelter and recreation cabins and trails in the 1930s which have been expanded and maintained by the U.S. Forest Service.

Newspapers in Sitka were not published during the Russian period. Some were imported from Europe and perhaps other places. The inhabitants of Sitka learned in the spring of 1867 from a newspaper published in Victoria, B.C. that Alaska had been sold. Military men and others tried publishing papers starting soon after the transfer, but these generally did not last beyond a few issues. Sheldon Jackson School students published a newspaper, The Verstovian, at times, which carried some local news. A weekly newspaper called The Alaskan was started in Sitka in 1884 and published until 1907. After that, newspaper coverage again was sporadic until the founding of the Sitka Sentinel in 1939, at first as a weekly. It became a thrice-weekly in 1941 and in 1950 began publishing five days a week, as it continues to do so under the name ,

32

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

one of only two locally-owned daily newspapers in Alaska. Various local institutions have published books, small literary and general interest magazines.

In addition to publications, the first movies known to have been shown in Sitka were in 1906 at a local public hall. A small movie theater called The Verstovian was established within a few years later, and at least one movie house has been operating ever since.

Much of Sitka’s history is reflected in the naming of its streets, public facilities, and other geographic features. Upon settlement by the Russians most of the place names in the area changed from Tlingit to Russian and were again renamed with American occupation. One specific example of this ethnic influence was Kekur, a Russian term meaning a rocky knob or outcrop at the tideline. It is seen on nautical charts with reference to features Figure 43: farther south on Baranof Island, but at one time was widely used locally as a Khaasdahe’en designation, the Kekur, for what is now Castle Hill. As noted earlier, the (Indian River), 1887. Tlingit traditionally called this site Noow Tlein. (University of Washington 2010) VII. Disasters and Natural History The natural history of the Sitka area has been largely shaped by its relatively recent emergence from the last Ice Age; this accounts for the relative paucity of both plant and animal species on Baranof Island. Due to glacial retreat the Island area is still undergoing isostatic rebound. The steady rise of the land above sea level is not as rapid as that experienced in areas of Southeastern Alaska to the north and east, but is still significant.

Considering its location within the Pacific Ring of Fire and exposure to the weather of the open North Pacific Ocean, Sitka has been spared from major natural disasters in historic times. Tlingit oral history accounts tell of catastrophic floods in the immediate Sitka area and rock cairns at the alpine level are said to be related to event. Volcanic ash in the vicinity of Sitka is evident of the last eruption of Mt. Edgecumbe some 4000 years ago.

Sitka’s worst disaster to date was man-made, though made worse by natural conditions. Early in the morning of January 2, 1966, fire broke out in a wood frame commercial building on the southeast corner of Lincoln and Maksoutoff Streets, apparently as a result of an electrical fault. The night was bitter cold, just above zero, with a gale-force wind from the east. The building was soon engulfed in flames. It was obvious Figure 44: Aftermath of that the fire would spread to St. Michael’s Cathedral, only a few yards the 1966 fire downtown away, which it did and the church was destroyed. Local people turned Sitka. (Sitka Tribal out to rescue most of the irreplaceable historic furnishings inside. Library 2010) Detailed architectural drawings of the building, made by the National Trust for Historic Preservation only the summer before, enabled an eventual accurate reconstruction of the Cathedral, which was consecrated in 1978. That fire also destroyed the nearby Lutheran Church and many other structures in the area, including a Russian log structure, the Tilson Building, on Lincoln and Maksoutoff streets. It was estimated that 20 percent of Sitka’s business district had been destroyed by the fire.

33

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA’S HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM

Long before the City and Borough of Sitka’s incorporation in 1971, historic preservation had been a grassroots philosophy in the community. These efforts are reflected in the rehabilitation and care of Sitka’s many historic properties and in its societies, non-profits, and museums. One example is the Sheldon Jackson Museum which has been in existence since 1887.

This section of the Plan reviews those efforts including laws on the many levels of government, society and nonprofit and individual efforts that have an effect on local properties.

Past Efforts Federal (Acts as amended) Historic properties are protected and preserved through a variety of federal, state, and local laws, private organizations, and various incentives programs. It is imperative to begin any dialogue on local preservation efforts with a discussion on federal-level legislation, as it provides not only the general backbone for our local guidelines but, in general, federal and state legislation are the prime impetus for the majority of preservation-related projects in Alaska. For example, archaeological projects conducted at Castle Hill. Numerous developments on Baranof Island, such as Hidden Falls, from the 1980s to the present have been completed in compliance with federal-level legislation. Preservation efforts at the federal level can be traced back nationally to the early 1900s. The Antiquities Act of 1906 provided some protection to historic sites, but it was not comprehensive in its scope. The Depression in the 1930s provided a boost to preservation activities with the Historic American Buildings Survey in 1933 by the National Park Service and the Historic Sites Act of 1935 that first established a national list of historically significant places, later to become the National Register of Historic Places.

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) Congress passed significant legislation in 1966 that reactivated the federal government’s involvement in, and support for, preservation activities by both public and private groups. NHPA mandated that all fifty states and the District of Columbia complete a comprehensive survey of historic resources and establish a State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The Act also established the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation that was charged with advising the President and Congress on all matters pertaining to preservation. The Council reviews and comments on federally funded or licensed projects that could have a significant impact on historic resources that are listed on, or are eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. This process is commonly known as Section 106 Review and is administered by individual State Historic Preservation Offices, as are most other federally mandated preservation activities.

In addition, the NHPA mandated the preservation of cultural properties of state and local, as well as national, significance. The Secretary of the Interior was authorized to expand the National Register of Historic Places, which is the official list of the nation’s cultural resources designated for preservation. Listing in the National Register provides protection by requiring comment from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation concerning the effect of federally-assisted projects on these resources. It also allows owners who rehabilitate certified historic income

34

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 producing properties to be eligible for federal tax benefits. See Appendix A for details of the NHPA of 1966.

1980 Amendment to NHPA to include the Certified Local Government Program The National Historic Preservation Act established the Certified Local Government Program to provide financial and technical assistance for preservation of historic resources at the local level. To participate in the program, a local government needs to establish a historic preservation commission and a program meeting state and federal standards. Once the SHPO and the National Park Service (NPS) determine these are in place, the local government then can request to be certified and participate in the program as a Certified Local Government (CLG). See Appendix F for details and requirements of the CLG program in Alaska.

Ten percent of annual Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) appropriations made to the states under the NHPA must be passed to CLGs through the SHPO office. In Alaska this is done through grants. Various kinds of projects are funded including: 1. Nomination of a historic property to the National Register of Historic Places 2. Survey and inventory of historic and archaeological resources 3. Preparation of preservation plans 4. Staff support for a local Historic Preservation Commission 5. Historic structure reports 6. Archaeological testing of sites to determine their significance 7. Development of public education preservation programs

Technical assistance, training in historic preservation goals and programs, and guidance on how to conduct specific projects are available through the SHPO office.

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) NAGPRA is a U.S. federal law passed on November 16, 1990, requiring federal agencies and institutions that receive federal funding to return Native American cultural items and human remains to their respective peoples. Cultural items include funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony. In addition, it authorizes a program of federal grants to assist in the repatriation process. It is now the strongest federal legislation pertaining to aboriginal remains and artifacts. The Sitka Tribe of Alaska and the Sitka National Historical Park have been successful in repatriating items of patrimony that once belonged to the local Tlingit people.

Private-Level Federal Preservation Private sector preservation efforts on the Federal level are led by the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP). In 1949 the U.S. Congress chartered the NTHP and provided funding for this organization through the Department of the Interior. Several years ago Congress stopped providing funding, and now the National Trust supports its programs through donations, memberships, and program income. Today, the Trust provides information and advice to persons and groups on preservation issues, and is actively involved in the preservation efforts of communities across the nation through technical assistance and various grant, loan, and educational programs.

35

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

The National Trust owns and operates a number of historic properties that are open to the public. The Trust only accepts ownership of properties if they are endowed to provide for the ongoing maintenance and upkeep of the property.

Other Federal Acts and Laws that affect Sitka’s Cultural Resources include:  1916 - National Park  1960 - Archaeological  1978 - American Service Organic Act and Historic Indian Religious  1935 - Historic Sites Preservation Act Freedom Act Act  1966 - Department of  1979 - Archaeological  1949 - National Trust Transportation Act (4f) Resources Protection for Historic  1970 - National Act Preservation Environmental Policy Act

State of Alaska The Alaska Office of History and Archaeology (OHA) carries out the responsibilities of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 set up the position of SHPO for each state to be appointed by the governor. In Alaska, the governor has designated the Chief of the Office of History and Archaeology as the SHPO. Judith E. Bittner is the Alaska SHPO. The responsibilities of the SHPO under the National Historic Preservation Act include (OHA 2010): 1. Statewide historic preservation planning (Alaska's Historic Preservation Plan) 2. Statewide survey and inventory of historic properties (Alaska Heritage Resources Survey) 3. Nominating properties to the National Register of Historic Places 4. Administering the federal historic preservation grants-in-aid program 5. Assisting local governments in developing historic preservation programs and in becoming certified to participate in the national program (Alaska's Certified Local Government Program) 6. Advising and assisting in federal, state, and local historic preservation projects 7. Participating in the review of federal, state, and local undertakings that may affect historic properties (Section 106 Review) 8. Providing public information, education, training, and technical assistance in historic preservation 9. Performing rehabilitation tax credit project reviews1974 - Alaska Historic Preservation Act 10. AS 11.46.482- Criminal Mischief in the Third Degree – to knowingly disturb grave sites, cemeteries, tombs, burials 11. 2010 revision of the Alaska Historic Preservation Plan

State Level Preservation Organizations Many entities that assist in the preservation of cultural resources in the State of Alaska; those that have importance on the local level include:  Alaska Association for Historic Preservation  Alaska Historical Society  Alaska State Museums

36

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Local Governance - City and Borough of Sitka It was the threat of demolition of Sitka’s downtown U.S. Post Office and Court House, built in 1937-38, that led to a grassroots effort to protect Sitka’s historic treasures. The Sitka Historic Trust Board formed and received funding from the Alaska Office of History and Archaeology to hire architects to assess the building. This funding was allotted under the premise that the board apply for Certified Local Government status. It was decided by the Board in a March 1992 meeting that becoming a CLG would offer the community advantages not only for the preservation of the old Post Office, but would further provide opportunities for protection, preservation, and community awareness for the historic properties of Sitka.

Upon promotion by the Trust throughout the community of these advantages and subsequent investigations commissioned by the Assembly, in January of 1993, the Assembly approved the conversion of the Post Office into a City Hall and established the Sitka Historic Preservation Commission.

In May of 1994 the Office of History and The Sitka U.S. Post Office (now Sitka’s Archaeology/State Historic Preservation Municipal Offices) The Sitka U.S. Post Office and Court House housed Office notified the City and Borough of Sitka the U.S. Commissioner, Customs, Marshal, that it had been recognized as a Certified Attorney, National Park Service, Forest Service, Local Government. The first order of business Fish and Wildlife Service, and had a detainment jail necessary to maintain this status was to write a cell. From 1938 until 1943 the building also housed preservation plan and develop an inventory of the on the second floor. In the 1930s the federal government built eight federal historic sites. The two-page plan was written buildings in Alaska, most in the Modern style. At by the Commission in 1997, and Vanguard the time, most Sitka buildings were wood frame, Research created the Inventory of Historic and the solid concrete construction was symbolic of Sites and Structures, City and Borough of the strong federal government. The architectural Sitka. Research for Part I of this inventory style retained the classical symmetry, proportion, and facade organization of its predecessors, but was began in 1995 and contained a preliminary stripped of the architectural ornamentation found on inventory and bibliography. Comments from earlier public buildings. Simple rectangular massing the OHA resulted in a Part II of the inventory with smooth surfaces was accented by the use of completed in 1997 and contained 325 historic low; relief suggesting classical elements. Piers and archaeological sites. These sites represented columns and were occasionally fluted but without capitals or bases. Fenestration in correspond with the State’s Alaska Heritage vertical, recessed panels and ornamental spandrels Resources Survey (AHRS) database and a was combined with Art Deco motifs. corresponding City and Borough of Sitka (CBS) site numbers. The sites include those not eligible for inclusion to the National Register of Historic Place and sites on state and federal lands, though nearly all are within the boundaries of the City and Borough. Also included in Part II were topographical maps of the borough and an enlarged map of the Sitka road system with site locations plotted according to the CBS and AHRS site numbers. Figure 45: U.S. Post Office, ca. 1930-40s Finally, included in Part II, to be used with (National Park Service 2010)

37

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 these maps, is a flow chart for a city review process to be used by the Planning Department and the Commission. Flow chart can be found in Appendix H.

The Sitka Historic Preservation Commission Although the Commission works directly with city departments, it is under the direction of the City Assembly. It is made up of seven seats: (4) Community At-large, (1) Native At-large, (1) Sitka Tribe of Alaska and (1) Sitka Historical Society. By city ordinance an Assembly liaison also partakes in meetings, but does not vote. See Appendix A for ordinance and Commission duty details.

One of the duties of the commission is to ―Review and Recommend on local projects that may affect historic properties‖. Through the years, this review process has been inconsistent and a burden to volunteers. An attempt was made in 2009 to streamline the review process by creating a checklist to be used by city officials, Commission members, and the public to assist in determining if a project should go before the Commission for review. Also developed was an application for review and an internal review form to assist the Commission (See Appendix I). This Plan is a further attempt to give direction to this process of review. In addition to local projects, the Commission is tasked by duty as a CLG to review federal and state projects that may have an effect on historic properties. The following is a timeline of events and accomplishments on the local leve: Ordinances 1991 - CBS Ordinance 91-9754 – Establishes Historic Trust Board 1992 - CBS Ordinance 92-1075 – Establishes Sitka Historic Preservation Commission 1993 - CBS Ordinance 93-1150 – Establishes Commission as a CLG 1997 - CBS Ordinance 97-1409 – Confidentiality of sensitive sites 2007 - City and Borough of Sitka’s Comprehensive Plan

Documents 1982 - Downtown Commercial Building Historical and Structural Survey, prepared by Stocker Construction, Inc. (HUD planning grant) 1997 – Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of Sitka – prepared by Vanguard Research 1994 – Sitka Historic Preservation Plan – Prepared by the Sitka Historic Preservation Commission

Sitka Tribe of Alaska (STA) Efforts: Below are some accomplishments on behalf of STA in the area of historic preservation. This is not a complete list and the efforts are continuing:

1995 – The Sitka Tribe of Alaska Historic Preservation Plan 1995 – National Park Service Preservation Grant to STA and Southeast Indian Cultural Center (now Southeast Cultural Center) - Southeast Alaska Native Place Name Project - Year II, to document traditional southeast Alaska Native place names and their associated cultural meanings 2003 – NPS Historic Preservation Fund Grant - A Celebration of Tlingit Weavers: the Doris Borhauer Basket Collection Documentation Project to document the lineage of the weavers, the origins of the baskets and the construction methods for each piece of the Doris Borhauer Basket Collection, comprised of 92 Tlingit spruce root baskets.

38

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

2008 – U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Grant – Comprehensive Survey of the Tlingit language in Sitka, Alaska. 2010 – At the time of this Plan, efforts by STA are underway and in the final stages to nominate the Sitka Indian Village as a National Historic District.

The Sitka Historic Preservation Commission has assisted in listing several sites on the National Register of Historic Places and assisted in the nomination of local National Landmark Sites. The following is a list of registered sites and National Landmarks:

Sitka’s National Register Sites  Cable House and Station  Emmons House  Hanlon-Osbakken House Grant funding obtained through the CLG  W. P. Mills House Program (60% federal share award)  Murray Apartments and Cottages 2010 – No award 2009 – (2 awards) $10,000 Sitka Sound  See House Science Center - Condition survey for Sage  Sitka National Historical Park Building on the SJ Campus, matched by Sitka  Sitka Pioneers' Home Sound Science Center, $10,000 Travel  Sitka U.S. Post Office and Court House expenses for scholars attending the Russian American Conference sponsored the SNHP,  St. Peter's Church matched by SE Cultural Center.  U.S. Coast Guard and Geodetic Survey 2008 - $12,000 to hire a consultant for a Seismological and Geomagnetic House preservation plan, matched by CBS 2003 - $9,000 for the Japonski Island Boathouse - schematic design National Landmark Sites 2002 - $15,510 for Japonski Island Boathouse -  Alaska Native Brotherhood Hall Condition/Haz Mat Survey  Castle Hill - American Flag Raising 1996 - $3,960 for Cultural Resources Inventory Site for CBS 1996 - $1,452 for nomination of the Old Post  Old Sitka Site (Redoubt St. Archangel Office (City Offices) to the National Register Michael Site) of Historic Places  Sitka Naval Operating Base and US 1995 - $4,355 for Phase I of Cultural Army Coastal Defenses Resources Inventory  TOTAL: $66,277 Russian-American Company Building No. 29 Other CLG Awards for Preservation Efforts  Sheldon Jackson School Campus in Alaska since 2005  St. Michael's Cathedral  Mat-Su - 220,555   Russian Bishop's House Juneau - $114,800  Anchorage - $39,000  Seward - $79,600 The Sitka Historic Preservation Commission has  Fairbanks - $70,800 assisted several nonprofit entities in the community  Ketchikan - $44,000 obtain grant funding and offered guidance in the  Kenai - $12,100 managing historic properties. It is the duty of the  Amanak - $7,000 Commission as both a CLG and by City ordinance  Dillingham - $8,000 to act in an advisory role to the Sitka Historical Society, the City and Borough of Sitka, and the Alaska Historic Sites Committee.

39

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Local Level Preservation Organizations There are countless numbers of individuals that take pride and work to preserve their historic properties. Newspaper man, Thad Poulson, has made extra efforts to rehabilitate historic properties in the community, including those on the Sheldon Jackson College Campus National Historic Landmark. Organizations dedicated to preservation include:  Friends of Sheldon Jackson College  Sitka Maritime Heritage Society – working to rehabilitate the Japonski Island boathouse, a Sitka Naval Air Station and Army Defenses National Historic Landmark site, to a maritime heritage center  Sitka Cultural Center – a partner to the Sitka National Historical Park promoting traditional Tlingit art and culture  Sitka Historical Society – manager of the Sitka Museum housing Sitka’s artifacts and collections  Cape Decision Lighthouse Society – Stewards since 1997 of that historic lighthouse on the western tip of , south of Sitka

40

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

RECOMMENDATIONS & ACTIONS Many of the recommendations relate to activities that could be undertaken to improve the operation of the Sitka Historic Preservation program. Where possible, there has been an attempt to identify funding and other support for action upon the recommendations made.

Recommendation 1: Amendment or Revision of Current City and Borough of Sitka Ordinance A historic preservation ordinance is the primary method by which towns, cities, counties, and boroughs can protect historic structures and districts. Most ordinances Local Register of Historic Places establish a Historic Preservation Commission and a In considering the designation of any area, property, or site as a historic district or process for consideration of proposals to alter or landmark, the board or commission shall demolish historic properties located within a designated apply the following criteria: district or boundary. An ordinance should reflect the unique circumstances within each community and go  Its character, interest or value as part through a public process in its development. The State of of the development, heritage or Alaska’s Office of History and Archaeology recommends cultural characteristics of the city, state the following basic components of a Historic or nation  Its location as a site of a significant Preservation Ordinance: historic event  Its identification with a person 1. Introduction and purpose significant in our past 2. Developing and updating a Historic Preservation  Its exemplification of the cultural, Commission economic or social heritage of the city, 3. Powers and duties of Preservation Commission state or nation  It portrayal of a group of people in an 4. Criteria and procedures for identification, review and era of history, characterized by a designation of historic districts and a register of distinctive architectural style individual historic places  Its embodiment of distinguishing 5. Procedures and standards for reviewing proposed characteristics of a building type or alterations (including demolition and new architectural style.  Its embodiment of elements of construction) of historic districts and design criteria architectural design, detail, materials 6. Permits or certificate of appropriateness or craftsmanship, which represent a 7. Appeals significant architectural innovation 8. Enforcement and penalties  Its identification as the work of an architect or master builder who work (For more detail on the recommended components of has influenced the city, state or nation  Its potential to yield information preservation ordinances see Appendix B.) important in prehistory or history (archaeology)

41

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Recommendation 2: Promote Historic Preservation in the Municipal Agenda and City Planning Process Guide growth and new development so it does not adversely affect the community’s historic character by establishing a framework for thoughtful decision-making in dealing with the myriad issues associated with preservation and appropriate physical changes within a historic environment. In the planning of all city projects and those requiring Economic Benefits city approvals, assure that The following statistics from recent studies are typical of the consideration be given to the positive findings of preservation’s economic benefits diverse assortment of values (RYPKEMA, Donald, 2010): related to the community’s  Rehabilitation of historic properties in Georgia during a religious, ethnic and racial makeup. five-year period created 7,550 jobs and $201 million in earnings.  Economic Benefits to Municipalities.  Historic preservation activities generate more than $1.4 The economic impacts and billion of economic activity in Texas each year. benefits of historic preservation  Each dollar of Maryland’s historic preservation tax credit are both far-reaching and leverages $6.70 of economic activity within that state. profound. Preservation is a vital economic development  In one year, direct and indirect expenditures by heritage tool for communities and tourists in Colorado reached $3.1 billion. regions, while at the same time  Oklahoma, a total of $357 million annually in direct it is a proven means for spending (including rehabilitation of historic structures, creating jobs, attracting heritage tourism, and the Main Street program) created investment, generating tax more than 8,000 jobs in Oklahoma. These jobs generated revenue, and supporting small $460 million in output, $166 million in labor income, $243 business and affordable million in gross state product, and $25 million in Oklahoma state and local tax revenues. housing. For more on the economic benefits see  In Michigan, $1 million in building rehabilitation creates Appendix C. 12 more jobs than does manufacturing $1 million worth of cars.  Further Explore  In West Virginia, $1 million of rehabilitation creates 20 Opportunities of the Main more jobs than mining $1 million worth of coal. Street Program through the National Trust for Historic  In Oregon $1 million of rehabilitation creates 22 more jobs Preservation. than cutting $1 million worth of timber. Main Street is the economic engine, the big stage, the core  In Pennsylvania $1 million of rehabilitation creates 12 more jobs than processing $1 million worth of steel. of the community. Our Main Streets tell us who we are and  In California $1 million of rehabilitation creates five more who we were, and how the past jobs than manufacturing $1 million worth of electronic has shaped us. We do not go to equipment. bland suburbs or enclosed shopping malls to learn about  In South Dakota $1 million of rehabilitation creates 17 more jobs than growing $1 million worth of agricultural our past, explore our culture, or products. discover our identity. Our Main  In South Carolina $1 million of rehabilitation creates eight more jobs than manufacturing $1 million worth of textiles. 42 (Rypkema 2005).

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Streets are the places of shared memory where people still come together to live, work, and play.

So what is Main Street? The phrase has been used to describe everything from our nostalgic past to our current economic woes, but when we talk about Main Street, we are thinking of real places doing real work to revitalize their economies and preserve their character. Specifically, Main Street is three things: a proven strategy for revitalization, a powerful network of linked communities, and a national support program that leads the field (National Trust for Historic Preservation 2010) For more information about the program, see http://www.preservationnation.org/main-street/.

 Toolbox for Review Process In addition to criteria for designation and procedures identified in an ordinance revision, city staff, commission members, and the applicant should have the means necessary to make informed decisions. The process for the applicant should be transparent, accessible (applications on city website), and consistent. Due process should be also be adhered to: (1) notice of the government action, (2) a hearing and (3) fair and informed decision-making. Actions: o City staff to develop a GIS and Zoning Overlay of historic resources to aid in the initial evaluation. o Commission members, know ruling principles: . know guidelines and standards . avoid conflicts of interest . be familiar with previous cases . review all applications and know the property . be professional . ask questions and be open-minded

 Cultural Sensitivity in Planning City planning and development should take into account the diverse ethnographic make of the community and incorporate such differences to bring a cohesive understanding and mutual respect for all. A very simple and yet historically overlooked consideration is that of using Tlingit place names for new streets and public facilities. As many of the areas had been previously named, preserving Sitka’s heritage includes recognizing the language of the first people to settle the area. Action: o Consult cultural entities within the community when appropriate during early planning and development stages of city projects.

43

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Recommendation 3: Update Historic Resources Inventory A Historic Properties Survey is a study designed to identify and evaluate properties in an area – a community, a neighborhood, a rural area, the area proposed for a land-use project- to determine whether they may be of historic, architectural, archaeological, and/or cultural significance.

The 1994 Sitka Historic Preservation Plan Survey Benefits specifies as its primary purpose: ―To create and  Enables Forward Looking, Proactive Local maintain an inventory of known prehistoric, Preservation: By surveying areas that have not been designated, you can identify areas where historic, and architectural resources within the City future preservation activity should take place and Borough of Sitka, Alaska‖. By means of a before the resources disappear. Certified Local Government grant, as noted earlier, an intensive survey of the cultural  Defines Character-Defining Features in Detail: resources of the City and Borough of Sitka was Not just for documentation, but also to inform Commission’s decisions. conducted in 1997 by Vanguard Research, Inc. This inventory contains 325 sites on Baranof and  Increases Public Awareness and Appreciation the surrounding Islands, some on federal or state of Historic Resources: Use the survey and lands. The majority of these sites have not been survey process to help educate the community. thoroughly investigated as to their eligibility for Surveyors can distribute information, answer inclusion to the National Register of Historic questions, and serve as preservation ambassadors while in the field. Places. In order for Sitka to gain full comprehension of its resources, a Local Register  Look Beyond Buildings: To include all visible with appropriate criteria should be developed and aspects of the environment that combine to form used to compile a useful inventory for the the local historic fabric, such as archaeological, community. cemeteries, gardens, lighthouses, parks, etc. Action: o Pursue CLG and/or other grant funding to update survey

Recommendation 4: Create Historic Preservation Officer Position within City Government It is difficult with a strictly volunteer Historic Preservation Commission for the review process to run efficiently and within the best interest of the community without an historic preservation officer position. Further, the community is missing out on many opportunities, funding, economic, and technical do the absence of this vital position. Action: o Continue to educate city government officials and the community of the benefits of an historic preservation officer position

Recommendation 5: Periodic Review of Historic Preservation Program A periodic review of all policies, programs, and documents relating to Sitka’s historic preservation program should be undertaken every five years to maintain standards of management Actions: o Develop a summary of work performed by the HPC in the past, i.e. number of reviews conducted, grants received, and advocacy actions carried out, and present to public o Develop a written work program on an annual basis

44

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Recommendation 6: Promote Heritage Tourism Paradoxically, it is the intangible benefits of historic preservation that foster one of its most significant and tangible benefits of a good historic preservation program, heritage tourism. The National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP) defines heritage tourism as ―traveling to experience the places, artifacts, and activities that authentically represent the stories and people of the past and present‖ (National Trust for Historic Preservation 2010). The following are some reason to promote heritage tourism: Actions: o Continue to educate the public and visitor Economic Benefits of Heritage Tourism of our cultural resources and the need to  The heritage traveler spends more, does protect and preserve them. Possible means more, and stays longer than other types of are brochures and walking tour maps. tourists. o Continue to promote the connection  For vacationers, visiting historic and cultural between sustainable heritage tourism and sites is second in popularity only to shopping the careful maintenance of an area’s  One of three international visitors to the U.S. historic character and authenticity. In order tours a historic or cultural attraction.  Creates jobs and economic activity. The to create a sustainable tourist destination, number of business and employment communities cannot allow new opportunities increases form heritage tourism development to shape community  Uses assets that already exist. character; it is the community’s historic character that must inform new According to a recent study by the Travel Industry development. Association of America:  The heritage or cultural traveler spends, on average, $722 per trip compared to $603 for all U.S. travelers; is more likely to participate in a wide range of activities, with shopping at the top of the list, (44% of such travelers rate shopping as their number one activity versus 33% of all travelers) and stays at a location 4.7 nights versus 3.4 nights on average.

 A West Virginia study found that, during 1996, heritage tourist expenditures created 390 jobs in businesses directly serving tourists and another 130 jobs as an indirect result of tourist activity, for a total employment impact of 520. These 520 employees earned $8.2 million for their work. Businesses did $15.4 million worth of sales with tourists. Combining the direct and indirect impacts, heritage tourism created an additional $46.7 million in volume.

45

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Recommendation 7: Promote and Increase Public Awareness of Historic Preservation  Schools: The educational opportunities offered by historic preservation are virtually limitless. For students, Historic Preservation Resources  Advisory Council on Historic Preservation teachers, and community partners, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. engaging in historic preservation efforts  Alliance for Historic Landscape Preservation brings home the importance of such Alliance for Historic Landscape efforts, and reinforces historical Preservation. education by allowing all those  American Association for State and Local History involved to actively participate in its American Association for State and Local History. conservation and protection.  The Association for Living History, Farm and Agricultural Museums Historic preservation takes occurs in The Association for Living History, Farm and such varied settings that students have Agricultural Museums. opportunities to learn lessons in history,  National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials mathematics, sociology, environmental National Association of Housing and studies, urban planning, transportation Redevelopment Officials. issues, economics, building crafts, and  National Preservation Institute other related disciplines. National Preservation Institute. Actions:  National Railway Historical Society o Develop educational programs National Railway Historical Society.  Historic Roads about the historic, architectural, Center for Preservation Education and archaeological and cultural Planning. resources of Sitka.  National Trust for Historic Preservation o Prepare lesson plans on the National Trust for Historic Preservation. community’s history. Organize a National Trust for Historic Preservation teachers’ workshop to explain how Library Collection Rural Heritage heritage education based on local  Save Outdoor Sculpture! resources enriches the learning Smithsonian American Art Museum. process.  Saving Graves Cemetery Preservation Alliance

46

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

 Community: Historic preservation helps keep communities beautiful, vibrant, and livable, and gives people a stake in their surroundings. It connects people with their past and with one another. History is a great educator, and coming to know the history of a community and its historical sites fosters an individual’s sense of belonging and community pride. A building’s design and construction tell us much about the cultures that created it and about the traditions and events from which our society developed. Historic preservation is a key ingredient in stabilizing older communities and bringing citizens together. Actions: o Organize social events to celebrate National Historic Preservation week and other National Preservation events. o Develop a community award program for preservation minded efforts.

 Environmental: Each existing building is an investment of energy, time, and resources. Razing historic structures has a triple negative effect on scarce resources, by throwing away materials and their embedded energy, by replacing them with new raw materials, and by expending transport energy for both. If these structures are simply destroyed that investment is wasted. Active historic preservation efforts can help to curb some of the detrimental environmental effects of suburban sprawl, including increased traffic burdens, energy consumption, and environmental waste. By safeguarding the historic cores of towns and cities and encouraging reinvestment in them, many adverse effects of growth can be greatly reduced (Rypkema, The Economic of Historic Preservaiton: A Community Leader's Guide 2005). Actions: o Support the restoration, preservation, rehabilitation, interpretation, stabilization or other appropriate treatments for historic and cultural resources. o Identify funding sources, including grants and capital projects that encourage preservation of historic and cultural resources. o Encourage stewardship of traditional cultural properties and archaeological sites. o Restoring buildings, rather than building new ones, or demolishing existing ones, is environmentally responsible. It is usually more environmentally friendly to rehabilitate existing structures and maintain and improve existing infrastructure than to simply destroy and replace them. o Develop a partnership with the Sitka Conservation Society to address these issues.

47

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

Recommendation 8: Pursue Historic Preservation Opportunities The Historic Preservation movement over the last decade has flourished, with increasing opportunities for funding, partnerships, and technology for preservation efforts. Actions: o Foster preservation partnerships with local, government, Funding and Program Assistance nonprofit, and corporate entities.  o Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance GSA. CAO. Work to build the capacity of Regulatory and Federal Assistance Division. the Sitka Historic Preservation (A database of all Federal programs available to State and local Commission so it can better governments; federally-recognized Indian tribal governments; perform its advisory and Territories (and possessions) of the United States; domestic coordination role with the City public, quasi-public, and private profit and nonprofit organizations and institutions; specialized groups; and and Borough Planning individuals). Commission, the Sitka  Federal Agency Historic Preservation Programs and Officers Historical Society, and the Sitka Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Tribe of Alaska.  Federal Funding Sources for Rural Areas Database USDA. o Pursue the National Trust for Nat’l Rural Information Center. Historic Preservation’s Main Please search for the programs below in the database for more details and contact information. Street Program for Sitka. o 10.433 Rural Housing Preservation Grants o 15.904 Historic Preservation Fund Grants-In-Aid o 15.915 Technical Preservation Services o 15.923 National Center for Preservation Technology and Training o 15.929 Save America's Treasures o 89.003 National Historical Publications and Records Grants  Heritage Preservation National Institute for Conservation.  History and Culture DOI. National Park Service. o Grants o Lighthouse Heritage o Technical Preservation Services  Preservation Technology and Training Grants DOI. NPS. National Center for Preservation Technology and Training.  Preserve America The White House.

48

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

CONCLUSION It is the hope of the Sitka Historic Preservation Commission that the entire community will rally around this working document for the purpose of finding common ground to manage Sitka’s cultural resources. Many misconceptions surrounding historic preservation exist, and one function of the Commission will be to educate within the community to protect Sitka’s historic treasures. It is a responsibility of the community to decide the appropriate levels of protection of these treasures. Many resources are available to assist the community in this pursuit as well as professionals within the community to share their knowledge of Sitka’s history. It is truly a community effort that will result in the success of Sitka’s endeavor for historic preservation.

49

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abele, Deborah. Sitka Preservation Plan Draft. Draft Preservation Plan, Phoenix: Arkos, LLC, 2010.

Alaska Department of Natural Resources. Alaska Land Records. 2010. http://plats.landrecords.info/?searchtype=auto&hitfield=N10163&collection=blm&datasource=n ull&value=1473 (accessed April 20, 2010).

Alaska Digital Archives. http://vilda.alaska.edu. September 2010.

Alaska DNR. Defining Features of the Sitka Naval Operating Base and U.S. Army Coastal Defenses NHL. Documentation, Anchorage: Office of Historic and Archaeology, 1980.

Alaska Office of History and Archaeology. Alaska Heritage Resource Survey Database. Anchorage, AK: Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Office of History and Archaeology, 2009.

Alaska Office of History and Archaeology. Alaska Heritage Resources Survey. Anchorage, Alaska, 2009.

Arndt, Katherine, Russell H. Sackett, James A. Ketz. A Cultural Resource Overview of the Tongass National Forest, Alaska. Juneau, AK: GDM, 1987.

Benson, Diane ('Lxeis'). Countries and Their Cultures: Tlingit-Early History. 2010. http://www.everyculture.com/multi/Sr-Z/Tlingit (accessed October 2010).

Betts, Robert C., Dee Longenbaugh. Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures City and Borough of Sitka. Inventory, Sandpoint: Vanguard Research, 1997.

City and Borough of Sitka. 2007 City and Borough of Sitka Comprehensive Plan Update. November 2007. http://www.cityofsitka.com/government/departments/planning/documents/CompPlanNovember0 6.pdf (accessed September 2010).

—. Sitka General Code. 1992,2010. http://www.codepublishing.com/AK/sitka.html (accessed September 2010).

Cornell University. Legal Information Institute. June 26, 1978. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0438_0104_ZO.html (accessed September 2010).

Davis, Stanley D. The Hidden Falls Site, Baranof Island, Alaska. Alaska: Alaska Anthropological Association, 1989.

DeArmond, R.N. and W.D. "Sitka Names and Places." Daily Sitka Sentinel, November 4, 2005: 7.

DeArmond, Robert N. From Sitka's Past. Sitka: Sitka Historical Society, 1995.

50

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

DeArmond, William, interview by Anne Pollnow. Russian American in Sitka (October 2010).

Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation. "Baranof Castle Hill State Historic Site Preservation Plan." Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Anchorage, 2010.

Emmons, George Thornton, and Frederica (Editor) De Laguna. The Tlingit Indians. : University of Washington Press, 1991.

Hope III, Andrew. Traditional Tlingit Country. 2003. http://www.ankn.uaf.edu/ANCR/Southeast/TlingitMap/TlingitMap.pdf (accessed September 2010).

Hope, Andrew II. The Traditional Tlingit Map & Tribal List Project. Sitka: Will the Time Ever Come?, A Tlingit Source Book, 2000.

Miller, Jay Ph.D. University of Washington Libraries. n.d. http://content.lib.washington.edu/aipnw/miller1.html (accessed September 2010).

Moss, Madonna. "Shellfish, Gender, and Status on the Northwest Coast of North America: Reconciling Archaeological, Ethnographic, and Ethnohistorical Records of the Tlingit." American Anthropologist 95, no. 3 (1993): 631-652.

National Park Service. National Register Sites. October 2010. http://nrhp.focus.nps.gov/natregsearchresult.do?fullresult=true&recordid=24 (accessed 2010).

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Federal Historic Preservation Laws. Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2006.

National Trust for Historic Preservation. Heritage Tourism. 2010. http://www.preservationnation.org/issues/heritage-tourism/ (accessed September 2010).

—. Main Street Program. 2010. http://www.preservationnation.org/main-street/about-main- street/ (accessed September 2010).

OHA. Alaksa State Historic Preservation Office. 2010. http://dnr.alaska.gov/parks/oha/shpo/shpo.htm (accessed 2010).

Pollnow, Anne. Recommendations of National Register of Historic Places Eligibility for Lot 50, Block 1, USS 2542, Sitka Indian Village, Sitka, Alaska. Cultural Resources, Sitka: Sea Level Consulting, 2009.

Ralph, Joylon and Ida Chau. The Mineral and Locality Database. 1993-2010. http://www.mindat.org/loc-198649.html (accessed October 2010).

Rypkema, Donald. Speeches. 2010. http://www.placeeconomics.com/Resources/Speeches.html (accessed September 2010).

51

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

—. The Economic of Historic Preservaiton: A Community Leader's Guide. Washington D.C.: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2005.

Service, National Parks. "National Historic Landmarks Database." National Parks Service. June 2, 1978. http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1206&ResourceType=Building (accessed February 9, 2010).

Sitka Native Education Program. Sitka Native Educaiton . January 2006. (accessed 2010).

Sitka Tribal Library. Romaine Hardcastle Collection. 2010. http://library.sitkatribe.org/cdm4/browse.php?&CISOSORT=descri%7Cf&CISOSTART=1,41 (accessed October 2010).

Society, Sitka Maritime Heritage. Sitka Maritime Heritage Society. 2006. http://www.sitkamaritime.org/maritimehistory.html (accessed September 2010).

Theodoratus, Dorothea. Sitka Tribe Historic Preservvation Plan. Washington D.C.: United States Department of the Interior, National Parks Service, 1995.

Theodoratus, Dr. Dorothea. Sitka Tribe of Alaska Historic Preservation Plan. Washington D.C.: United States Department of Interior, National Park Service, 1995.

UAA-ISER. APPENDIX III. 1998-2004. http://www.alaskool.org/projects/ancsa/tcc2/TananaChiefs_Apnd.html (accessed 2009).

University of Alaska, Fairbanks. Alaska Native Knowledge Network. August 2006. http://ankn.uaf.edu/ANCR/Southeast/TlingitMap/ (accessed August 2009).

University of Washington. Digital Collections. 2010. http://content.lib.washington.edu/index.html (accessed April 20, 2010).

USGS. USGS History. April 10, 2000. http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/c1050/intro.htm (accessed April 20, 2010).

Wikipedia. Captain James Cook. 2010. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cook (accessed September 2010).

Wikipedia Foundation, Inc. Wikipedia. August 18, 2009. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baranof_Island (accessed 2009).

52

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

APPENDIX A: CHRONOLOGY OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION LAWS AND ITS RELATION TO THE CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA AND THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION

The following contains excerpts from Federal and State Acts and City and Borough of Sitka Ordinances, General Codes, and Comprehensive Plan pertaining to Preservation laws as they affect the Sitka Historic Preservation Commission, a Certified Local Government (CLG). Comments in bold type are that the author intended to clarify the intent of the laws. Attached, in full, are the Alaska Historic Preservation Act and City and Borough of Sitka Ordinances and Codes cited in this paper and section 16 U.S.C. 470 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

1966 – National Historic Preservation Act became law. Declaration by Congress 1. the spirit and direction of the Nation are founded upon and reflected in its historic heritage 2. the historical and cultural foundations of the Nation should be preserved as a living part of our community life and development in order to give a sense of orientation to the American people 3. historic properties significant to the Nation’s heritage are being lost or substantially altered, often inadvertently, with increasing frequency 4. the preservation of this irreplaceable heritage is in the public interest so that its vital legacy of cultural, educational, aesthetic, inspirational, economic, and energy benefits will be maintained and enriched for future generations of Americans 5. in the face of ever-increasing extensions of urban centers, highways, and residential, commercial, and industrial developments, the present governmental and nongovernmental historic preservation programs and activities are inadequate to insure future generations a genuine opportunity to appreciate and enjoy the rich heritage of our Nation 6. the increased knowledge of our historic resources, the establishment of better means of identifying and administering them, and the encouragement of their preservation will improve planning execution of Federal and federally assisted projects and will assist economic growth and development 7. although the major burdens of historic preservation have been borne and major efforts initiated by private agencies and individuals, and both should continue to play a vital role, it is nevertheless necessary and appropriate for the Federal Government to accelerate its historic preservation programs and activities, to give maximum encouragement to agencies and individuals undertaking preservation by private means, and to assist State and local governments and the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States to expand and accelerate their historic preservation programs and activities.

Title I, Historic Preservation Programs Section 101 (16 U.S.C. 470) (a)(7) The Secretary (of Interior) shall promulgate, or revise regulations –

53

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

(C) certifying local governments, in accordance with subsection (c)(I) of this section and for the allocation of funds pursuant to section 103 (c) of this Act [16 U.S.C. 470c(c)]. (b)(3) It shall be the responsibility of the State Historic Preservation Office to administer the State Historic Preservation Program and to – (A) in cooperation with Federal and State agencies, local governments, and private organizations and individuals, direct, and conduct a comprehensive statewide survey of historic properties and maintain inventories of such properties; (E) advise and assist, as appropriate, Federal and State agencies and local governments in carrying out their historic preservation responsibilities; (F) cooperate with the Secretary, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and other Federal and State agencies, local governments, and organizations and individuals to ensure that historic properties are taken into consideration at all levels of planning and development; (H) cooperate with local governments in the development of historic preservation programs and assist local governments in becoming certified pursuant to subsection (c) of this section; (I)(ii) the content and sufficiency of any plans developed to protect, manage, or to reduce or mitigate harm to such properties; (c)(1) Any State program approved under this section shall provide a mechanism for the certification by the State Historic Preservation Officer of local governments to carry out the purposes of this Act and provide for transfer, in accordance with section 103 (c) of this Act [16 U.S.C. 470c(c)], of a portion of the grants received by the States under this Act, to such local governments. Any local government shall be certified to participate under the provisions of this section if the applicable State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Secretary, certifies that the local government – (A) enforces appropriate State or local legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties; (B) has established an adequate and qualified historic preservation review commission by State or local legislation; (C) maintains a system for the survey and inventory of historic properties that furthers the purposes of subsection (b) of this section; (D) provides adequate public participation in the local historic preservation program, including the process of recommending properties for nomination to the National Register; (E) satisfactorily performs the responsibilities delegated to it under this Act. (c)(2) (A) …in the Nomination of Historic Properties to the National Register, 60 days for local Commission review and a further 60 for SHPO review.

54

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

(3) Any local government certified under this section or which is making efforts to become so certified shall be eligible for funds under the provision of section 103(c) of this Act, and shall carry out any responsibilities delegated to it in accordance with such terms and conditions, as the Secretary deems necessary or advisable. (4) For the purposes of this section the term – (A) ―designation‖ means the identification and registration of properties for protection that meet criteria established by the State or the locality for significant historic and prehistoric resources within the jurisdiction of a local government; and (B) ―protection‖ means a local review process under State or local law for proposed demolition of, changes to, or other action that may affect historic properties designated pursuant to this subsection.

Summary: The NHPA creates policy law regarding Federal properties. It also establishes State Historic Preservation Offices and Certified Local Governments and discusses their roles and responsibilities in the protection of Historic Properties.

1970 – Alaska Historic Preservation Act (41.35) Sec. 41.35.010 Declaration of Policy It is the policy of the state to preserve and protect the historic, prehistoric, and archaeological resources of Alaska from loss, desecration, and destruction so that scientific, historic, and cultural heritage embodied in these resources may pass undiminished to future generations. To this end, the legislature finds and declares that the historic, prehistoric, and archaeological resources of the state are properly the subject of concerted and coordinated efforts exercised on behalf of the general welfare of the public in order that these resources may be located, preserved, studied, exhibited, and evaluated.

Summary: The AHPA creates policy laws regarding State properties and establishes the Alaska Historic Preservation Commission to enforce this Act as peace officers.

1992 – City and Borough of Sitka Ordinance No. 92-1075 An Ordinance of the City and Borough of Sitka amending Title 2 of the Sitka General Code to add Chapter 2.58 establishing a Sitka Historic Preservation Commission. 3. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish a local preservation commission to undertake specified historical preservation duties including survey and inventory review; nominations to the National Register; preservation, education, and advice, and enforcement of local and state preservation laws. 4. Enactment. Now, Therefore, be it enacted by the Assembly of the City and Borough of Sitka that Title 2 of the Sitka General Code is amended to add Chapter 2.58 which shall read as follows:

55

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

2.58.040 Powers and Duties The Commission Shall: A. Prepare and maintain an inventory of buildings and sites of historical, cultural, architectural, geographical, and archaeological significance located in the City and Borough of Sitka. B. Develop a local Historic Preservation Plan including provision for identification, protection, and interpretation of the area’s significant resources. Such a plan shall produce information compatible with and for the Alaska Historic Preservation Plan (AHRS)*. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Assembly of the City and Borough of Sitka. C. With prior approval of property owner, review and develop nominations to the National Register of Historic Places for properties within the City and Borough of Sitka. D. Review and make recommendations, with prior approval of the Assembly, about local projects that might affect properties in the local historic preservation plan. E. Work towards the continuing education of citizens regarding historic preservation of the community’s history. F. Support the enforcement of the Alaska Historic Preservation Act (AS 41.35). G. Act in an advisory role to the Sitka Historical Society, the City and Borough of Sitka Planning Commission, and the Alaska Historic Sites Advisory Committee on all matters concerning historical districts in historic, prehistoric, and archaeological preservation in the City and Borough of Sitka. H. Perform other activities which are necessary and proper to carry out the above duties and any other actions determined by the Assembly to be beneficial to carry out historic preservation goals of the City and Borough of Sitka. I. Coordinate with the Sitka Tribe of Alaska in historical matters involving Alaska Natives with the understanding that the Commission shall defer to the Tribe in matter concerning Alaska Natives in Sitka.

* Note – AHRS = Alaska Heritage Resources Survey – This is a database of all the recorded Sites in the State of Alaska.

Summary: Establishes the Sitka Historic Preservation Commission and their responsibilities.

1993 – City and Borough of Sitka Ordinance No. 93-1150

3. Purpose. The State Historic Preservation Officer has suggested changes to the Ordinance creating the Sitka Historic Preservation Commission

56

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

which allow Sitka to be designated as a Certified Local Government. 4. Enactment. Now, Therefore, be it enacted by the Assembly of the City and Borough of Sitka that section 2.58.040 of the Sitka General Code is amended… C. Subsection D is amended to delete the words: ―with prior approval of the Assembly‖

Summary: Sitka Historic Preservation Commission established as a Certified Local Government. Duties and responsibilities include enforcing policy set by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.

1997 – City and Borough of Sitka Ordinance No. 97-1409 3. Purpose. There is concern in the community that because the inventory will include the location of grave sites and other sacred sites that its treatment as a public document would compromise their safety and privacy. Federal and State law provide exceptions to the Freedom of Information Act for such inventories. 4. Enactment. Now, Therefore, be it enacted by the Assembly of the City and Borough of Sitka that Chapter 2.58 of the Sitka General Code is amended to add section 2.58.50 which shall read: 2.58.050 Confidentiality. The Inventory is not public document and the information it contains is exempt form requests under Federal and State Freedom of Information laws. The legal authority for withholding public access to this information is specified in AS 9.25.210, The Archaeological Resources Protection Act. (16 U.S.C. 470 HH) and the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 W-3).

Summary: City and Borough of Sitka further supports Federal and State laws in the protection and confidentiality of grave and sacred sites.

2007 City and Borough of Sitka’s Comprehensive Plan

2.4 General Land Use Goals and Policies 2.4.16. To publicly encourage community awareness of the value of protecting historic and cultural resources and to recognize organizations that improve the historic character of buildings and sites. 2.4.17. To encourage the beautification and cleanup of Sitka through means such as public acknowledgement and recognition. 2.4.18. To encourage the preservation and/or renovation of historical buildings and sites on public lands. The Native community shall be especially encouraged to participate. This goal incorporates the following objectives: A. The Sitka Historical Preservation Commission and the Sitka Historical Society shall be asked for recommendations when naming public streets and facilities.

57

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

B. The City and Borough shall encourage the preservations, renovation and interpretation of buildings and sites related to World War II activities within the Sitka road system, the surrounding islands and remote locations within the Borough. C. The Borough shall actively encourage preservation and maintenance of cemeteries throughout the Borough by local groups and individuals.

2.5 Urban and Residential Goals and Policies 2.5.3. To encourage the prevention of deteriorating building conditions and the rehabilitation of deteriorating residential areas, and to: A. Encourage the rehabilitation of older residential areas 2.5.4. To enhance the historic character of older neighborhoods, including the Native Village. Work collaboratively with the Sitka Tribe of Alaska to enhance the historic and residential character of the village.

2.11 Arts and Cultural Goals and Policies

2.11.1 To recognize that Sitka’s arts and culture activities are: A. Essential to the quality of life. B. Integral to the economic base of the community. C. Diverse in their religious, ethnic, and racial makeup

2.11.4 To continue support of the Arts in the following ways: A. By identifying and creating an active list of programs which enrich cultural life in Sitka, and making this list available to the public. B. In the planning stages of all City projects and projects needing city approval, assure that considerations are given to aesthetics, cultural issues, historic values, landscaping and public art. C. Ensure protection and enhancement of historic places including, but not limited to, cemeteries, historic buildings, landmarks, and public art. D. By supporting the creation of an Arts and Culture coordinator in Sitka, whose job it would be to help develop cultural opportunities as well as assisting with the scheduling of public spaces. 2.11.5 To follow relevant laws pertaining to: A. Art in public places B. Cultural resources and archaeological surveys in response to federal and state provisions. 2.11.7 In matters regarding arts and cultural issues, the Borough shall consult with appropriate organizations such as: …E. Sitka Historic Preservation Commission

2.13. Recreation Goals and Policies Historical and Cultural Facilities 2.13.37. To preserve and appreciate Sitka’s heritage. Sites or structures having significant historic or cultural value should be preserved. A. Support the reuse of the Japonski Island Boathouse as a WWII and Maritime History Interpretive Center.

58

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

2.13.38. To support the management of the Japonski Island Causeway as follows: A. Undertake efforts with the managing agencies to have this area retained in the public domain, the long-term objective being the creation of a WWII Memorial Park. B. Work with the appropriate agencies to obtain funding for improved boat access. 2.13.39. To produce a long range and coordinated plan for development of the historic downtown area of Sitka. The Sitka Historic Preservation Commission should be consulted on all issues effecting preservation and enhancement of the unique character of downtown Sitka to the extent feasible.

2.14. Ethnic Diversity and Native Issues 2.14.1. To make Sitka a place where cultural differences are recognized as an asset, and a place where indigenous and all ethnic groups are an integral part of the community.

59

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

APPENDIX B: CONTENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE.

Introduction and Purpose: Establishes the need, benefits, and purpose of protecting historic resources, and points to the economic, social aesthetic, and cultural benefits. Definitions: Explains key terms used in the ordinance such as landmark, historic district, alteration, and demolition stay. Authorization of Preservation Commission: Describes the composition and qualifications of commission members, length of terms, appointment process, and role of the commission. Powers and Duties of Preservation Commission: Compiling and updating historic and archaeological survey Establishing operating rules Designating landmarks and districts according to criteria set forth in ordinance Reviewing demolition permits and instituting demolition stays Reviewing requests to alter or modify designated historic properties Performing environmental review of all new plans and ordinances pertaining to historic resources as prescribed by state and federal laws Making recommendations to the Assembly on matters of funding, studying, and making programmatic suggestions for historic preservation Developing an updating a Historic Preservation Plan Promoting historic preservation Advising owners of historic properties Performing other historic preservation-related functions as appropriate.

Criteria and Procedures for Identification, Review and Designation of Historic Districts and a Register of Individual Historic Places: Set forth criteria to be used for bestowing historic designations and procedures to be followed, including applying for historic designation, providing public notices, and holding meetings.

Procedures and Standards for Reviewing Proposed Alterations (including demolition and new construction) of Historic Districts and Design Criteria: Defines design standards and guidelines for rehabilitation, usually following The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995). Describe the types of changes subject to design review and the standards the Commission will use to evaluate these changes. This section also sets out the timetables for Commission decision-making, in order to insure timeliness and fairness.

Permits or Certificate of Appropriateness: Establishes permit and approval procedures for design review of projects impacting designated historic properties, including demolition.

Appeals: Provides a legal appeals process for any interested party appealing a decision of the Preservation Commission.

Enforcement and Penalties: Provides for methods of enforcement of the ordinance.

60

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

APPENDIX C: ECONOMIC REASONS FOR A MUNICIPALITY TO INVEST IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

Studies conducted in a number of states over the last 15 years support some general findings: Job Creation. Historic preservation projects create jobs, especially in the manufacturing, retail trade, services, and construction sectors. In FY 2008, projects approved for federal tax credits had average budgets of $4.58 million and generated 55 jobs each. Tax Revenue. Historic preservation makes a substantial contribution to tax collections for state and local governments as well as the federal government. Investment Leveraging. Public funds as well as other public investment in historic preservation projects through grants, revolving funds, loans, and tax credits are matched many times over with private investment in local rehabilitation projects. In 2008, for example, approximately $1.128 billion in federal tax credits stimulated private investment totaling $5.64 billion. Property Values. Historic preservation in localities and neighborhoods generally helps to maintain property values. For example, while complex and locality-specific, research in both commercial and residential areas in several locations in Colorado concluded that historic designation did not decrease property values, but increased value or maintained it at the same level as nearby undesignated areas. Small Business Development. Local and regional heritage tourism initiatives and similar community programs generate small business investment and strengthen other public investments. Many statewide studies have found the National Main Street program highly effective and extremely cost-effective. Heritage Tourism. Visitors to states, localities, and regions spend billions of dollars while visiting historic sites and cultural attractions. Visitors to historic sites and cultural attractions stay longer and spend more money than other kinds of tourists, and therefore make an important contribution to local lodging and restaurant taxes, suppliers of goods and services, and other businesses. Projects that advance heritage tourism are proven economic generators, leveraging existing resources to achieve immediate results for a wide range of local and small businesses. More than $3.7 billion was spent by tourists visiting historic and cultural sites in Florida, it was reported in 2002. Public Property Management. Publicly-owned historic properties help anchor and sustain communities, attract investment, and such a property may provide a visitor destination in addition to other uses. They support local and regional economies through ongoing facility operations, repair and maintenance, concessions, and other related enterprises.

61

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

APPENDIX D: PUBLIC SURVEY FORM

62

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

APPENDIX E: ADGENDA FOR PUBLIC MEETING (Developed by Debbie Abele)

City and Borough of Sitka Historic Preservation Meeting December (2 or 3), 2009 Time, Place

Proposed Agenda

Introductions

What is a Historic Preservation Plan?

Typical Components of a Historic Preservation Plan

How is a Historic Preservation Plan Used?

The Importance of Community Input to create a Viable Plan

Issues and Opportunities that the Sitka Historic Preservation Plan should address

Q & A

63

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

APPENDIX F: ALASKA’S CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAM Alaska Certified Local Government Historic Preservation Program State Guidelines A. Purpose. The CLG program is to: B. 1. ensure widespread participation of local governments in the national historic preservation program while maintaining standards consistent with the National Historic Preservation Act and The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation (http://www.cr.nps.gov/locallaw/arch_stnds_0.htm); 2. enrich, develop, and help maintain local historic preservation programs in cooperation and coordination with the SHPO; and 3. provide financial and technical assistance for these purposes. B. Requirements for certification. Local governments are certified when the SHPO and the Secretary of the Interior, through the National Park Service, certify the local government meets five requirements set out in Federal Regulations (36 CFR 61). The requirements are: 1. The local government must agree to enforce appropriate state and local legislation for designation and protection of historic properties. a. The local government will enforce the Alaska Historic Preservation Act whenever appropriate. b. The local government will adopt and enforce a local historic preservation ordinance. 2. The local government must establish an adequate and qualified historic preservation review commission by local legislation. a. The local government will enact an ordinance establishing the commission. Communities and boroughs with historical commissions may adapt an existing commission for the CLG program and expand their duties to include historic preservation responsibilities. The ordinance should direct the commission to meet a minimum of two times a year, and should define appointment of and terms for members. b. The local government will compose its commission of the following members to the extent feasible: 1 architect or historical architect 1 archaeologist 1 historian and at least four other people (for a minimum total of 7). The membership should include Alaska Natives. 1) A local government may be certified without the minimum number or types of disciplines if it can provide written documentation to the SHPO that it has made a reasonable effort to fill those positions. 2) If a professional discipline is not represented in the commission membership, the commission shall seek expertise in this area from consultants meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (defined in Appendix A, 36 CFR 61). 3) If the SHPO has delegated National Register program responsibilities to the CLG, the local commission must meet all applicable federal requirements. c. The local government’s historical preservation commission will:

64

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

1) develop a local historic preservation plan providing for identification, protection, and interpretation of the area's significant cultural resources. This plan is to be compatible with the Alaska historic preservation plan. 2) review and make recommendations about local projects that might affect properties identified in the historic preservation plan. 3) review nominations to the National Register of Historic Places for properties within its jurisdiction. 3. The local government must maintain a system for the survey and inventory of historic properties. a. The local government will establish and maintain a basic working inventory of cultural resources in the local area, compatible with the Alaska Heritage Resources Survey (AHRS), and annually provide new data to the Office of History and Archaeology. b. CLG survey data shall be consistent with SHPO inventory requirements and The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. This requirement does not apply to survey data produced by local governments before the date of CLG certification. c. The local government will establish policies and procedures for access and use of the inventory that addresses sensitive site location information. 4. The local government must provide for adequate public participation in the local historic preservation program. a. The local government will provide for open meetings. b. The local government will maintain minutes that are publicly available, publish and disseminate historic preservation commission procedures, as well as comply with local, state, and federal public participation regulations. c. The local government will invite public comment in its review of nominations to the National Register of Historic Places. d. The local government will provide for public participation in development and review of the local historic preservation plan. 5. The local government must satisfactorily perform the responsibilities delegated to it under the National Historic Preservation Act. a. The local government will provide an annual report of all its historic preservation activities to the SHPO. b. The local government will provide a commission member list and members’ qualifications to the SHPO as part of its annual report. c. The local government will provide a draft of the local historic preservation plan for SHPO review. d. The local government will provide annual updates of AHRS information to the Office of History and Archaeology. C. Procedures for certification. It is the local government, not the commission, that is certified. The jurisdiction of the CLG is that of the local government and must coincide with its geographic boundary. A local government, however, may perform required CLG activities through existing historic district commissions or other qualified agencies or organizations. Such arrangements must be detailed in written agreements in which the SHPO has concurred, that specify the responsibilities, authority, and accountability of each party. Each party must meet Alaska’s CLG requirements pertinent to its CLG activity.

65

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

1. An application for CLG certification is to be made by the chief elected or appointed official of the local government to the Alaska SHPO. The application must include: a. Documentation showing applicant meets the federal definition of a local government and has the authority to enforce legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties. b. A statement that the local government will comply with all appropriate federal and state historic preservation laws and regulations. c. The local historic preservation ordinance. d. A copy of the most recent version of the local government's comprehensive plan. e. Resumes for the historic preservation commission: archaeologist, historian, architect or architectural historian, and the names and occupations of all other members with a statement of each member’s expertise. If a professional position is not filled, the name and resume of the consultant who will be used must be provided. f. A list of properties in its cultural resources inventory. g. A copy of the local government’s historic preservation plan, outline, or draft. h. An explanation of how the public will participate in the local historic preservation program. i. An explanation of how a qualified local commission will review National Register of Historic Places nominations. j. A narrative and flow chart explaining how local projects that might affect historic properties will be reviewed by the commission, and position titles of those individuals involved in the review process. k. A copy of the certification agreement. 2. Review of the application for CLG certification will be done by the SHPO and NPS staff within 45 days of receipt. Additional documentation or clarification may be requested from the applicant. A representative of the SHPO may conduct an on-site visit to: a. determine that the systems documented in the application are in place, b. assist the local government in establishing an inventory compatible with the AHRS, and c. provide orientation and training to the local government staff and members of the local preservation commission. 3. The SHPO will notify the local government in writing within 30 days whether or not the local government meets the state requirements for certification. 4. If the application meets the requirements, the SHPO will send the package to the NPS for concurrence. The NPS has 15 working days to review the package. If the NPS concurs with the SHPO recommendation for certification, the NPS will notify the SHPO in writing and send a copy of the letter to the CLG. 5. A certification agreement signed by the CLG and the SHPO completes the certification process. The effective date of certification is the date the SHPO signs the certification agreement. The agreement remains in effect until the CLG requests decertification or the SHPO decertifies the CLG following the process outlined in section I. 6. A local government certification agreement can be changed when the SHPO and CLG agree. In such event a request is sent to the NPS for concurrence. The NPS will notify the SHPO in writing of its concurrence with any changes and send a copy of the letter to the CLG. NPS written concurrence must be received before changes will be in effect. D. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. CLGs and local governments interested in becoming CLGs are encouraged to adopt The Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation relevant to their activities. Locally developed standards and guidelines are

66

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 acceptable if they are consistent with these. Local guidelines not in accord with the Secretary's standards, or that specifically recommend or require action in conflict with the standards, are not acceptable. The SHPO will not allocate HPF funds to implement unacceptable guidelines. E. The National Register of Historic Places process. 1. Before a nomination of a property within the jurisdiction of a CLG is submitted to the Keeper of the National Register by the state, the SHPO will notify the chief elected local official and the commission in accordance with 36 CFR 60, 36 CFR 61, and state procedures. This notification will ask the CLG for local historic preservation commission review of the documentation and a determination ofeligibility for listing the property in the National Register. The CLG notification procedures do not apply when a nomination is processed by or through a CLG, which provides its recommendation to the SHPO with the documentation. 2. After providing a reasonable opportunity for public comment, including the solicitation of comments from all local tribal entities, the local preservation commission shall determine whether or not, in its opinion, the property meets the National Register criteria. Within 60 calendar days of notice from the SHPO, the CLG shall transmit in writing the determination of the commission to the SHPO. If the CLG does not provide its determination within 60 days, the SHPO can proceed with the nomination process. For a property nominated for its architecture, the architect on the commission, or consultant, must agree the property is eligible for listing under that criterion. For a property nominated for its archaeological potential, the archaeologist on the commission, or consultant, must agree the property is eligible for listing under that criterion. 3. If either or both the commission and the chief elected local official recommend that the property is eligible for the National Register, the SHPO can proceed with the nomination process. If both the commission and the chief elected local official determine that the property is not eligible for the National Register, the SHPO may not proceed with the nomination of the property unless an appeal is filed in accordance with Section 101(c)(2) of the National Historic Preservation Act and 36 CFR 60. 4. Any determination made by the CLG or recommendation from the chief elected local official will be included with the documentation submitted by the SHPO to the Keeper of the National Register. 5. The SHPO may delegate to a CLG, through its CLG procedures and the Certification Agreement, any of the responsibilities of the SHPO pertaining to the National Register of Historic Places. Any delegated responsibilities will be performed in accordance with the requirements for the state. The SHPO may authorize the historic preservation commission of a CLG to act for the Alaska Historical Commission (AHC) for the purpose of considering National Register nominations within the CLG’s jurisdiction, provided the commission meets the professional qualifications required for the AHC. F. Grant funding through the Historic Preservation Fund. 1. The state will designate at least 10% of its yearly HPF appropriation to the CLG program. The state will designate 50% of any excess of the state's HPF appropriation to the CLG program in any year in which the nationwide HPF appropriation exceeds $60 million (36 CFR 61.7a) a. Only CLGs are eligible to receive these grant funds. b. All CLGs are eligible to receive funds from the 10% of the HPF appropriations. The state is not required, however, to award funds to all CLGs eligible to receive funds. c. Other federal grants may not be used as matching share for any HPF grant funds to CLGs.

67

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 d. All CLG activities assisted with HPF grant funds must meet The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. e. A CLG shall adhere to any requirements mandated by Congress regarding the use of HPF funds. 2. Examples of types of projects funded through grants to CLGs: • preparing documentation for the National Register of Historic Places • surveying and inventorying historic and archaeological resources • preparing preservation plans • supporting a local historic preservation commission • developing local design guidelines • preparing historic structure reports • writing or amending preservation ordinances • testing archaeological sites to determine their significance • developing public education preservation programs • preparing exhibits and brochures about local historic resources and the activities of the historic preservation commission • holding special events to educate the public about local history, resources, and historic preservation • developing local designation programs 3. To be eligible for these grant funds, the CLG must continue to comply with the terms of its certification agreement. Applications for CLG grant funds will be reviewed by the SHPO for completeness and accuracy. The AHC will review the proposals and make recommendations on grant allocations to the SHPO. The SHPO will make the final awards. a. Funds will be awarded on a competitive basis to CLGs. Criteria for grant selection include: 1) request for activities eligible for HPF assistance, 2) availability of matching share (40% of total project costs), 3) clear, realistic and precise goals for the funds, attainable within the funding period, 4) meets priorities for funds established by the AHC and the SHPO, 5) demonstrates relation to state and local historic preservation plans. b. The AHC will consider projects for funding based on priorities it establishes annually. Criteria include the extent to which a project seeks to help properties that may be adversely affected by development or natural dangers such as erosion; the extent to which the project has potential to find and document properties that qualify for the National Register of Historic Places; the extent to which the project is part of other historic preservation projects or programs; the extent to which the scope of work is consistent with available funding and time; and the extent to which the project will enhance the knowledge and understanding of the history or prehistory of a given area. 4. A CLG may use grant funds for activities involving historic or archaeological resources outside the jurisdiction of the CLG if the activity clearly demonstrates a direct benefit to identifying, evaluating, and protecting the historic and archaeological resources of the CLG, and if the CLG and any local or tribal government with jurisdiction agree. 5. Grants may be pooled by CLGs for specific purposes. For example, several CLGs can pool grant funds to share the services of a preservation professional. 6. CLG grants may be administered by a third party if the CLG indicates in its application that it wants any award to it to be administered by a specific organization. Designation of a third-party

68

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 to administer a subgrant is not a procurement action. Such a delegate agency may be another unit of local government, a commercial firm, a nonprofit entity, or an educational institution as long as it has the administrative capability required by the NPS Historic Preservation Fund Grants Manual. The third party, however, cannot be the SHPO or any part of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. 7. Funds will be transferred and monitored following HPF grant guidelines established by the Secretary of the Interior. Funds will also be administered and monitored by the state and by the CLG according to the applicable sections of OMB Circular A- 102, Attachment P, "Audit Requirements." Indirect costs may be charged as part of a CLG grant only if the subgrantee meets the requirements of Chapter 12 of the NPS Historic Preservation Fund Grants Manual. G. Delegated Section 106 responsibilities. 1. The SHPO may delegate to a CLG, through its CLG procedures and the Certification Agreement, any of the responsibilities of the SHPO pertaining to the Section 106 responsibilities, if a programmatic agreement has been executed with the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation (http://www.achp.gov/). Any delegated responsibilities will be performed in accordance with the requirements for the state. H. Monitoring and evaluation. 1. The SHPO will monitor CLGs to assure that each continues to meet the requirements for certification and is satisfactorily conducting its responsibilities as a CLG. a. The CLGs will be monitored through annual reports, correspondence, telephone conversations, and, when possible, visits to the local government. 2. Each CLG shall submit a written annual report of its activities to the SHPO, due in the spring for the previous calendar year. a. Annual reports shall include information relating to commission membership and meetings, planning, survey activity, inventory updates for the AHRS, local project reviews, and participation in the National Register of Historic Places program. 3. The SHPO will conduct periodic evaluations of each CLG to determine whether or not the local government continues to meet minimum state performance requirements for CLGs. a. The evaluation will be based upon annual reports submitted by the CLG, grant performance, grant products, and telephone conversations, correspondence and visits to the CLG by SHPO representatives during the review period. b. If the SHPO needs additional information from the CLG for evaluation, the SHPO will clearly indicate to the CLG that the information is being requested as part of an evaluation. c. Within 60 days after an evaluation, the SHPO will send the CLG a written evaluation of its performance in program operation and administration for the review period. 1) If deficiencies are identified, the written evaluation shall include suggestions to the local government for correcting the deficiencies and a time frame for correcting them. 2) The CLG will have 60 days from the date of the report to comment on the evaluation and recommendations. 3) The SHPO will provide training and technical assistance, as appropriate, to the CLG staff and its commissioners to assist in correcting deficiencies. 4) If the deficiencies are not corrected within the time frame established, the SHPO may take steps towards decertifying the local government. I. Decertification.

69

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

1. If a CLG’s historic preservation program is found to have major deficiencies after a formal evaluation or during the course of routine monitoring, the SHPO will advise the CLG that failure to correct the program deficiencies within six months may result in decertification. a. If sufficient improvement is not made by the end of the six months, the SHPO will decertify the CLG and notify the Secretary of the Interior that the CLG is decertified. b. In an instance where the SHPO decides on an involuntary decertification of a CLG, the SHPO will provide the CLG with written notice of intention to decertify and include the specific reasons for the proposed decertification. 2. The CLG may request voluntary decertification at any time by petitioning the SHPO in writing. a. After consultation with a representative of the local government, the SHPO will forward the written request for decertification to the NPS. b. Upon receipt of the NPS’s written determination of decertification, the SHPO will inform the local government of the official date of decertification. 3. If the CLG has been delegated Section 106 responsibilities in its jurisdiction by the state, and a programmatic agreement has been executed with the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation (http://www.achp.gov/ ), then the SHPO must notify the Advisory Council that the CLG has been decertified. 4. If a local government wishes to become recertified it must reapply for certification. 5. Decertified local governments with unfinished HPF grants. a. Decertification will not release the CLG from any prior obligations under federal HPF grant guidelines. b. Decertification, by itself, may not constitute grounds for termination of a CLG grant unless the terms of the grant cannot continue to be met after decertification. J. Additional information. The Office of History and Archaeology has additional information available through its Historic Preservation Series to assist a community interested in becoming a CLG. Many of the issues in the Historic Preservation Series are available on the office’s web page (http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/parks/oha_web/index.htm). Copies can also be obtained by calling or writing the OHA. Topics include: • The Certified Local Government Historic Preservation Program in Alaska • Basic Components of a Historic Preservation Ordinance • Annual Certified Local Government Report Outline • Applying For Historic Preservation Fund Grants: Writing a Successful Application • Sample Local Project Review Process • Alaska Certified Local Governments 2003 Directory • The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (http://www.cr.nps.gov/local-law/arch_stnds_0.htm). K. Key to abbreviations AHC...... Alaska Historical Commission AHPA...... Alaska Historic Preservation Act AHRS ...... Alaska Historic Resources Survey CFR ...... Code of Federal Regulations CLG...... Certified Local Government HPF...... Historic Preservation Fund NHPA...... National Historic Preservation Act

70

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

NPS...... National Park Service NRHP ...... National Register of Historic Places OHA ...... Office of History and Archaeology SHPO...... State Historic Preservation Officer L. Glossary Alaska Heritage Resources Survey (AHRS) is Alaska’s inventory of prehistoric and historic sites. The inventory is maintained at the Office of History and Archaeology. Alaska Historic Preservation Act (AHPA) is the state legislation governing historic preservation and the management of historic, prehistoric and archaeological sites, as set forth in 1971 (AS 41.35) and its implementing regulations (11 AAC 16). Alaska Historical Commission (AHC) is the state review board that reviews and makes recommendations to the SHPO on CLG grants from the Historic Preservation Fund. Certified Local Government (CLG) is a local government with a historic preservation program that has been certified to carry out the purposes of the National Historic Preservation Act. Chief elected local official is the elected head of a local government. CLG share is the funding authorized for transfer to local governments through grants in accord with the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) is the monies accrued under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, as amended, to support the program of matching grants-in-aid to the states for historic preservation programs and projects, as authorized by Section 101(d)(1) of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. Historic preservation commission is a board, council, commission, or other similar collegial body, which is established in accordance with 36 CFR 61.4 (c)(2). Keeper of the National Register is the official with whom authority has been delegated by the Secretary of the Interior for expanding and monitoring the NRHP, listing properties, and determining the eligibility of properties for inclusion. Local government is a city, municipality, or borough, or any other general purpose political subdivision of any state. National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is the national list of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture, maintained by the Secretary of the Interior under authority of Section 101(a)(1)(A) of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. National Park Service (NPS) is the bureau of the Department of the Interior to which the Secretary of the Interior has delegated the authority and responsibility for administering the National Historic Preservation Program. Office of History and Archaeology (OHA) is the office within the Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, authorized to carry out the Historic Preservation Fund program in the state and maintaining the Alaska Heritage Resources Survey (AHRS). Secretary is the U.S. Secretary of the Interior. Unless otherwise stated in law or regulation, the Secretary has delegated the authority and responsibility for administering the National Historic Preservation Program to the National Park Service. Secretary’s Standards and Guidelines is The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. These provide technical information about archaeological and historic preservation activities and methods. They are prepared under the authority of Sections 101(f), (g), and (h), and Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. The subjects covered include preservation planning, identification, evaluation, registration, historic research and documentation, architectural and engineering documentation, archaeological investigation, historic preservation projects, and preservation terminology. State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) is the

71

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 official within each state who has been designated and appointed by the Governor to administer the historic preservation program in the state under authority of Section 101(b)(1)(A). Revised 8-15-2003

72

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

APPENDIX G: 1997 SITKA HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN

73

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

74

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010

APPENDIX H: SITKA FLOWCHART

75

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 APPENDIX I: COMMISSION REVIEW FORMS Sitka Historic Preservation Commission Check List For Undertakings That May Impact A Heritage Resource(s) Yes No ______Does the Undertaking involve construction, rehabilitation, manipulation to a National Landmark?

______Is the Undertaking within 300 feet of a National Landmark?

______Does the Undertaking involve construction, rehabilitation, manipulation to a site on the National Register?

______Is the Undertaking within 300 feet of a site on the National Register?

______Does the Undertaking involve a site in the Alaska Heritage Resource Survey inventory?

______Is the Undertaking on an island other than Baranof or Japonski?

______Does the Undertaking have the potential to affect a Traditional Cultural Property (TCP) or a site that could be investigated as a TCP?

______Does the Undertaking come within 300 feet of an area: a. where an important event took place b. associated with a significant person from our past c. that has yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history d. that embodies 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 represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction e. A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance f. A building or structure removed from its original location but which is primarily significant for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event g. A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building directly associated with his or her productive life h. A cemetery which derives its primary importance from graves of persons of transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or from association with historic events i. A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived j. A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance k. A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance.

**If you have checked “Yes” to any one of these questions consider the Undertaking a project that may have a potential impact to a Heritage Resource(s) and continue with a “Request for Review Coversheet”. 76

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 Sitka Historic Preservation Commission Coversheet For Request for Review of Potential Impacts to Heritage Resource(s)

A. Contact Name______Address______City______State______Zip______Phone______Fax______email______

B. Agency undertaking project: (circle)

Private City State Federal Department______

C. Date Agency received proposed project:______

D. Are Federal funds involved (grants, funding, agency) yes no

E. Are State funds involved (grants, funding, agency) yes no

F. Will the project affect a National Historic Landmark or a site in the National Register of Historic Places? (See Appendix A) yes no

G. Is the site listed in the Alaska Heritage Resource Survey inventory? yes no If yes, Site Number______Preservation Status______(refer to AHRS inventory for more information)

H. Is the Project within the Sitka Indian Village or Downtown Sitka yes no

I. Describe the proposed project ______J. Purpose/Objectives for the undertaking ______K. Attach:  Copy of a map of the proposed project including latitudinal and longitudinal information  Property owner information  Any other pertinent information Drop off the coversheet and attachments at the City Planning or Building Departments or mail to: Sitka Historic Preservation Commission C/O City and Borough of Sitka 100 Lincoln Street Sitka, Alaska 99835 Notes to Applicant:  Review will take place only during regular commission meetings or on an as needed basis  The meetings are public and convene the second Wednesday of each month as advertised  Review process may take up to 60 days  The SHPC reserves the right to request additional information and/or time to review projects

ACTION: ______SIGNED: ______DATE: ______77

Sitka Historic Preservation Plan 2010 Sitka Historic Preservation Commission Internal Review Evaluation and Review of Potential Impacts to Heritage Resource(s)

A. Contact Name______Address______City______State______Zip______Phone______Fax______

B. Agency undertaking project: (circle)

Private City State Federal

Department______

C. Are Federal funds involved (grants, funding, agency) yes no (If yes, refer to regulation under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act)

D. Will the project affect a National Historic Landmark or a site in the National Register of Historic Places? (See Appendix A) yes no

E. Is the site listed in the Alaska Heritage Resource Survey inventory? yes no If yes, Site Number______Preservation Status______(refer to AHRS inventory for more information)

F. Describe the proposed project ______

G. Describe potential impact on Heritage Resource(s) ______H. Will this project have a cumulative impact on degrading the resource? yes no If yes, how? ______I. List interviews, public hearings, other parties involved. ______J. Commission recommendation: Approval? yes no Does the Approval include Mitigation measures? yes no Explain______

SIGNED:______DATE:______

78