BELMEAD ON THE JAMES CHARRETTE

Follow-Up Meeting April 30th, 2010

Belmead on the James
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 BELMEAD-ON-THE-JAMES
MEETING #4 AGENDA
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Friday April 30th, 2010

AGENDA / SCHEDULE
1:00-1:30 p.m. Review of Meeting #1 Workgroup Results
CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW 1:30-2:30 p.m. Review of Meeting #2 & 3 Expert Group Observations and Recommendations
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS 2:30-4:00 p.m. Follow-Up Question / Discussion
MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 BELMEAD-ON-THE-JAMES
CHARRETTE PROCESS OVERVIEW
Belmead on the James
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE MEETING #1: February 26-27th, 2010

CHARRETT PROCESS Large Group / Work Group Discussions
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1 MEETING #2: March 19th, 2010

WORKGROUP SESSIONS
Technical Experts Meeting
MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
MEETING #3: March 30th, 2010
PROPERTY EXPERTS Property Experts Meeting
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS
MEETING #4: April 30th, 2010
Recommendations and Next Steps
APPENDIX

Continuing Investigations:
•Building
•Property
 MEETING #1 WORKGROUP SESSIONS RESULTS
WORKGROUP DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Belmead on the James
Charrette
1. What makes Belmead unique and can those qualities be something that brings people and
income to the property? Are there attributes that are detractors or attractors that can be
modified or enhanced to support on-going and future programs at Belmead?
AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
2. What should be done with the Mansion? What are its potential uses and can it support and
OVERVIEW be compatible with the stated goals of FrancisEmma, Inc. and the SBS? Can the Mansion
MEETING #1 serve as a focal point for the entire property and what form should that take?
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2 3. Are there other potential revenue sources that should be considered to address the cost of
TECHNICAL EXPERTS
renovation/preservation and future management of the property and real estate? What other
MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS organizations/institutions would provide a good model for Belmead?
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS / 4. Given the history of the property and the natural resources, what is the message that
NEXT STEPS
Belmead should convey to the general public as part of an outreach campaign? How should
APPENDIX this message be delivered?
 MEETING #1 WORKGROUP SESSIONS RESULTS
WORKGROUP QUESTION #1 – PART 1
Belmead on the James What makes Belmead unique and can those qualities be something that brings people and income
Charrette
to the property?

Size
AGENDA / SCHEDULE •Largest property in region
Existing Architecture
•AJ Davis original structure
•Approx. 2300 Acres
CHARRETT PROCESS •The building is a nationally significant historic landmark
•Contiguous Parcel (Not broken into smaller parcels
OVERVIEW

Location/Proximity History
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS •Unique History
•Proximity to Major Metropolitan Areas/Resources (Washington,
•Sense of Purpose
Richmond, Charlottesville)
MEETING #2 •Secrecy
TECHNICAL EXPERTS
•Regional Population to support activities
•Historical Attributes
•Transportation/Accessibility
•Special Place for African Americans
MEETING #3 •Located along major transportation/growth corridor (Highway 288)
PROPERTY EXPERTS •Layers of History
•Potential Rail Transportation Access
•Religious
•Potential River Transportation Access
MEETING #4 •Architecture
RECOMMENDATIONS /
•Close to public parks – 1 state park, 1 regional park
•Slavery
NEXT STEPS •Close to new state park
•Empowerment
•2-1/2 Miles of Riverfront along James River
•Environment
APPENDIX •Bounded by mostly undeveloped/rural adjacent parcels
•Education
•Sequestered/Protected/Isolated
•Multiple historic overlays- multiple stories to be told;
•Plantation Era (Cocke Family)
Natural Resources/Environment •School Era (St. Francis, St. Emma)
•Commitment to Conservation •Present Era (FrancisEmma Inc.)
•Conservation Easements •Sustainability / Self Sustenance Tradition
•Park like quality:
•Open Space
•Woodlands
•Animals
•2.8 miles of James River Frontage
•20 miles of trails maintained
•Potential for eco-tourism/education/seminars/bird-watching
•Prime agricultural land
•Potential for Organic/Sustainable Agribusiness
 MEETING #1 WORKGROUP SESSIONS RESULTS
WORKGROUP QUESTION #1 – PART 2
Belmead on the James Are there attributes that are detractors or attractors that can be modified or enhanced to support
Charrette
on-going and future programs at Belmead?

Detractors Modifications/Enhancements
AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
Location/Proximity Transportation
OVERVIEW •Most successful sites embedded in or close to urban areas
•Add Passenger Boat/Ferry Service on River
•Transportation/Accessibility
MEETING #1
•Add Passenger Train Access (CSX Rail Line on north side of river)
•Not adjacent to major transportation corridors
WORKGROUP SESSIONS •No mass transit/alternative transportation options available
•Poor or difficult way finding/signage to and around site
Community Outreach/Awareness
MEETING #2 •Develop connections and partnerships: Local/Regional/National -
TECHNICAL EXPERTS
Universities/Institutions
Natural Resources/Environment •Develop Communications Strategy to share history and vision
MEETING #3 •Existing Conservation Easement
PROPERTY EXPERTS •Develop Business plan/model for operation
•Limits future development/use opportunities
MEETING #4 Natural Resources/Environment
RECOMMENDATIONS / Existing Architecture
NEXT STEPS •Expand Use/Opportunities of Natural Resources/Environment
•Poor maintenance
•Provide access to other groups (Private/Public/Institutional)
•Very high cost of restoration
APPENDIX
•Not code or ADA compliant for public uses
•High operating costs (old/inefficient building systems)
Infrastructure
•Structural damage/at risk •Alternative/Sustainable energy sources
•Failing roof systems •Water Power opportunities in Deep Creek
•Geothermal Fields
•Wood Pellets/Biomass systems
Existing Infrastructure
•Roads not sufficient for high traffic (Gravel roads)
•Washed out bridge between St. Emma’s and St. Francis (1972)
•Need new sewer/septic system

Community
•Lack of public awareness
•Lack of solid idea/direction for future use
•Lack of hard data, demographic study
 MEETING #1 WORKGROUP SESSIONS RESULTS
WORKGROUP QUESTION #2
Belmead on the James What should be done with the Mansion? What are its potential uses and can it support and be
Charrette
compatible with the stated goals of FrancisEmma, Inc. and the SBS? Can the Mansion serve as
a focal point for the entire property and what form should that take?
AGENDA / SCHEDULE Private Events/Activities
•Weddings
CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW
•Reunions

MEETING #1 Educational/Training/Conference Center

WORKGROUP SESSIONS •Boarding School
•Apprentice projects
MEETING #2
•Working laboratory…Incorporate restoration process with students education.
TECHNICAL EXPERTS
•Field Schools – tuition and grant dollars as income.
MEETING #3 •Center to study sustainable tactics/practices in historic buildings/construction.
PROPERTY EXPERTS •Sustainable building technology center.
•Expose visitors to the means by which the resources of the site were used in the past to sustain life and how these ideas can be
MEETING #4
implemented today. “What is old is new again.”
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS •Agricultural Related
•Organic Farming Center: practice and training
APPENDIX •Culinary School

Museum/Historic Center
•Interpretive & Special Studies School
•Location for traveling exhibits
•“Smithsonian Museum of African American Experience”
•Artifacts Display
•Archaeology – Alexandria Jackson Davis
•Site/Property Interpretation Center

Retreat Center
•A Place for respite, retreat or rejuvenation
•Multidisciplinary education retreat – visiting writers and artists

Ecotourism Center
 MEETING #1 WORKGROUP SESSIONS RESULTS
WORKGROUP QUESTION #3 – PART 1
Belmead on the James Are there other potential revenue sources that should be considered to address the cost of
Charrette
renovation/preservation and future management of the property and real estate?
Events/Activities Fees Direct Funding Opportunities
•Weddings •Government
AGENDA / SCHEDULE
•Retreats/Conferences •Tax Credits
CHARRETT PROCESS
•Equestrian Events •Grant Funding
OVERVIEW •Ecotourism Fees SAT
•Birding Preserve America
MEETING #1 •River Canoe/Kayak launch •Corporate Sponsorships
WORKGROUP SESSIONS •Biking •Private Sector/Community
MEETING #2
•Camping •Alumni
TECHNICAL EXPERTS •Donors
Educational/Training/Conference Center Attendee Tuition •Board members
MEETING #3 •Social justice / diversity training /Environmental Education
PROPERTY EXPERTS Programs Partnerships
•Government and Corporation •Explore Connections, Partnerships
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS / •Craftsman apprenticeships •Virginia Military Institute (Cocke connection, architecture)
NEXT STEPS •Seminar/Demonstration Programs •Colleges & Universities in area
•Culinary School •Compatible/Allied organizations
APPENDIX •Organic Gardening/Farming •Local and Regional groups
•Virginia Tech
Museum/Historic Center •Highland Center
•Visitor Admission Fee •Outward Bound
•HBCU land grant in VA – Christiansburg
Retreat Center
•Attendee tuition/facility use fees Land Development
•Land for Alternative Energy Development
Agricultural Uses/Leases •Energy production –Sell to Dominion Hydro opportunities (Deep
•Vineyard Creek)
•Allotments, garden plots for lease •Targeted Development of Gateway Area
•Nurseries
Film Location Opportunities
•Fees to use property as film setting (VA Tax Credit to
encourage/attract film production in state)
 MEETING #1 WORKGROUP SESSIONS RESULTS
WORKGROUP QUESTION #3 – PART 2
Belmead on the James What other organizations/institutions would provide a good model for Belmead?
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE Faith Based Organizations Private Organizations

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW Sisters of Providence of Saint Mary of the Woods YWCA
http://www.spsmw.org/ http://www.ywca.org/
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS
Appalachian Mountain Club - Highland Center
MEETING #2 National Trust for Historic Preservation Sites http://www.outdoors.org/
TECHNICAL EXPERTS
Brucemore, Cedar Rapids, Iowa High Mountain Institute
MEETING #3 http://www.brucemore.org/ http://www.hminet.org/
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4 The Chautauqua Institution, New York Maine Coastal Semester Foundation
RECOMMENDATIONS / http://www.ciweb.org/ http://www.chewonki.org
NEXT STEPS
Montpelier Teton Science School
APPENDIX http://www.montpelier.org/ http://www.tetonscience.org

Kykuit – Rockefeller Estate North Cascade Institute

http://www.hudsonvalley.org/content/view/12/42/ http://www.ncascades.org/
 MEETING #1 WORKGROUP SESSIONS RESULTS
WORKGROUP QUESTION #4 – PART 1
Belmead on the James Given the history of the property and the natural resources, what is the message that Belmead
Charrette
should convey to the general public as part of an outreach campaign?

AGENDA / SCHEDULE History

•African American History / Native American
CHARRETT PROCESS •Sister Mother Mary Katherine
OVERVIEW •AJ Davis/Architectural
MEETING #1
•Historical Uses
WORKGROUP SESSIONS
Community
MEETING #2 •Reunion / Family / Generations
TECHNICAL EXPERTS •Homecoming
•Network / Kinship Groups / Place
MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS •Cocke / Slave Family Descendants

MEETING #4 Spirituality/Healing
RECOMMENDATIONS / •Place of Spiritual and Social Healing
NEXT STEPS •Holy Place
APPENDIX
Environment
•Natural Resources
•Relationship to Environment
•Local Foods
•Natural Beauty

Interconnected Mission
•Future / Present / Past
•Center for sustainable living / social healing & justice
•A future with sustainability as the focus.
 MEETING #1 WORKGROUP SESSIONS RESULTS
WORKGROUP QUESTION #4 – PART 2
Belmead on the James How should this message be delivered?
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE Alumni

•Create well organized Alumni /Family database
CHARRETT PROCESS •Include the alumni, they are critical to getting out the message.
OVERVIEW •“Alumni Workday” as opportunity to get people involved, share the task and the story as an experience?
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS Develop Historical Narrative Threads/Connections
•African American History Month as a vehicle to draw attention and potential opportunities
MEETING #2 •Connections to St. Katherine Drexel
TECHNICAL EXPERTS •Connections to Cocke Family/Civil War Era
MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS
Develop Partnerships for Communication/Outreach

MEETING #4 Website
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS Film/Oral History
•Share alumni stories, share the richness of the place and its historical roots.
APPENDIX

Word of Mouth to Personalize Message

 MEETING #2 TECHNICAL EXPERTS MEETING
DATE: March 19th, 2010
Belmead on the James Attendees:
Charrette Maynard Ball B+B
Paul Beckmann B+B
Brian Pritham B+B
Mark Wenger MCWB
AGENDA / SCHEDULE Rob Nieweg NTHP
John Jeanes Director of Operations, The Montpelier Foundation
Jamie Gibson Gibson/Magerfield Corp, General Contractors
CHARRETT PROCESS
Mike Hurd Hurd & Obenchain, MEP Engineers
OVERVIEW
Glenn Telfer Draper Aden, Civil Engineers
MEETING #1 Ed Frisa Nolan Frisa Structural Engineers
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS THE GROUP EVALUATED THE BUILDING AND MADE OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RELATIVE TO THE FOLLOWING CATAGORIES
MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS
• STRUCTURE
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
• ROOF
NEXT STEPS • EXTERIOR WALLS
• FENESTRATION
APPENDIX
• INTERIOR WALLS AND CEILING
• FLOORS
• MILLWORK
• MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
• ELECTRICAL AND LIGHTING SYSTEMS
• PLUMBING SYSTEMS
• FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS
• WASTE WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS
• PHONE/DATA/CABLE SYSTEMS
 MEETING #2 TECHNICAL EXPERTS MEETING
Observations
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Structure
In general the structure of the house is in good shape. The areas that are of critical concern have mostly to do with the exterior walls and bearing structure of the floors
around the perimeter of the house where water has clearly been coming in through the roof. Of particular concern were the north tower (facing the river) which is suffering
from settlement and deterioration of brick and masonry above the second floor. It was clear there has been enough settlement that the stairs to the roof and the south wall
of the tower were beginning to bow and crack. This crack could be seen at the second floor. The cause of this settlement is probably largely due to both water infiltration
AGENDA / SCHEDULE as well as seepage along the foundation due to inadequate drainage away from the house. There is evidence that masonry repairs were made at some time in the past at
the bearing level of the roof framing and above along the parapet walls that surround the roof itself. Some dry/wet rot was observed at the exposed roof framing were
CHARRETT PROCESS visible. In other areas of the attic which were accessible such as the open framed attic space around the dome, the framing members appeared to be in good shape and
OVERVIEW we did not see evidence of insect damage or rot in the wood members themselves. Attic floor framing above the second floor appeared to be in solid shape.
On the second floor several areas had suffered from water damage from the parapet flashing and internal gutters around the perimeter of the main roof. This has led to
MEETING #1 wood rot at the fire-cut floor joists and in several places there is evidence of continuing water infiltration and damage. Of particular concern was the second floor bathroom
WORKGROUP SESSIONS on the north side of the house where ceilings have fallen in and obvious decay was observed. It is apparent that the roof flashings and guttering systems are in failure at
several locations around the house and these areas must be dealt with immediately to prevent further decay. It should be stated that most of the areas that were visible
MEETING #2 showed some damage to the floor joists although much of the attic floor framing above the second floor ceilings was not visible and therefore further investigation will be
TECHNICAL EXPERTS needed to confirm the extent of damage along the exterior walls. It would be reasonable to assume that due to the detailing of the floor joists and the direct bearing within
the exterior masonry walls, that similar conditions exist and that there are other areas like the second floor bathroom where joists will need to be reinforced or replaced. In
MEETING #3 the large auditorium room in the 1895 addition it was observed that in at least one area dust and sand seemed to be loose behind the paneling and running out onto a
PROPERTY EXPERTS window sill in the northeast corner of the room. This would suggest that there might be a failure in the mortar that is within this wall and that it is falling out. It is not clear
how extensive this failure is due to the paneling in place but this area needs to be examined to quantify the extent of the problem. It would be reasonable to assume that
MEETING #4 this condition is also the result of water infiltration and damage within the wall itself again stemming from failure at the roof and gutters.
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS The first floor has not been as affected by the water damage that was observed at the second floor but it is safe to say that unless the roof is addressed the damage
occurring around the perimeter will soon be seen on the first floor.
APPENDIX
The basement walls appear in most places to be in fairly good shape in spite of obvious water collection along the exterior and rising damp observed in many places. The
house has an external window well or moat along the north and south sides of the house which appears to be directing water from what gutters remain to the west end of
the building. There is considerable damp in both wells and particularly along the north side. Mortar in some areas of the stone work is deteriorated and would need to be
scraped out and repointed but would not be a structural concern. In the area of the 1895 addition there has been a deflection in one of the main structural girders which
was addressed at some point in the past with shoring in a most unusual fashion of stacked 2x 8’s. Some further investigation into the long term use of this as a structural
support should be undertaken to identify any possible movement or settlement that might be affected by this shoring.

No widespread termite damage was observed although there appeared to be dry rot and some older termite damage in various areas of the first floor joists. In the
basement there are also areas where the wood joists are pocketed into the brickwork and have rotted away due to the infiltration of water in some cases from above but
also from rising damp. Recently there has been standing water observed in the basement during the recent storms at the end of March and this would suggest that water is
leaking in both due to the lack of proper guttering as well as collecting along the sunken window wells along the north and south sides of the house.
 MEETING #2 TECHNICAL EXPERTS MEETING
Observations (cont.)
Belmead on the James Roof
Charrette The current roof is a combination of different material systems ranging in some cases from copper flashing and sheet metal to slate and more recently asphalt shingles.
The failure of internal guttering system which is behind the parapet crenellated walls above the roof are the main culprits of the water infiltration that is causing the major
damage of the building and must be addressed immediately. Discussion about types of roofing systems, cost and need to address the issue of water infiltration in the short
term would suggest that a qualified roofing contractor with experience in this kind of roof/parapet system should be consulted. Due to the multiple materials and layers of
roofing systems that have been installed over time, further investigation will need to be done to evaluate the condition of the roofing and flashing systems and the condition
AGENDA / SCHEDULE of the parapets themselves. This is of the utmost importance for arresting the deterioration and damage to the house and must be undertaken in the current year.
Discussion ranged from historic preservation issues and appropriateness of roof system to what could be done in the near term if money is an issue. Suffice it to say, all
CHARRETT PROCESS agreed that the roof was the single largest issue facing the house and how and what is done would need to be carefully considered by having a reputable roofing contractor
OVERVIEW come to Belmead and make an evaluation and recommendation on how to proceed.

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS
Exterior Walls
The walls of the house are full brick masonry with lime mortar stucco on the exterior. Most of these have been painted over time and while we were not able to determine if
MEETING #2 the house was painted originally, it is safe to say that the house has been painted several times in the past. It was observed that a careful delineation of struck joints exists
TECHNICAL EXPERTS in the original stucco work on the main house and in some cases these are directly related to the architecture or the house itself. One area in particular that this occurs is
within the ceiling and walls of the entry portico itself where the patterning of the joints is related to the arched ceiling and vaulting. There is currently no insulation in the wall
MEETING #3 system. It appears that there have been several areas that have been patched or repaired including the parapets. This is probably true also in many areas of the roof
PROPERTY EXPERTS parapets. It can be assumed that at some point a Portland cement system was used to patch areas of the exterior walls. This would need to be verified but is likely that at
some point this probably occurred on both the 1850’s original house and the 1895 addition. In some places it appears that the stucco has become separated from the
MEETING #4 brickwork. There are a few places where the stucco finish is spalling off the house particularly around the north tower and at the northeast corner of the 1895 addition.
RECOMMENDATIONS / Testing and verification of the extent that patching using Portland cement occurred should be undertaken and if proved as such should be removed and repaired using a
NEXT STEPS lime based mortar. This would also be true for any mortar used in the brick wall structure itself, particularly where mortar has been observed to be crumbling and needs to
be repointed. Where brick is missing or cracked similar brick should be used to repair the existing walls. It was related to the group that the original brick was made on site
APPENDIX when both the house was built and later when the addition was added in 1895. Due to the fact that the many other buildings that used to make up Belmead and St. Emma’s
are now gone, it may not be possible to find existing brickwork that would match the original. However, since the house is stucco this is less a concern as long as the brick
matches shape, type and quality. Because the house is on the National Register and was built as a full masonry wall without insulation, it would be the recommendation of
the Technical Advisory Group to leave the existing walls intact and not try to incorporate an interior or exterior insulation system at this time.
 MEETING #2 TECHNICAL EXPERTS MEETING
Observations (cont.)
Belmead on the James
Charrette Fenestration
The windows at Belmead are original and one of the most important elements of the house. The windows consist of milled wood probably of oak. Many of the windows are
gothic and contain original glass in some cases hand etched. Peeling and cracked paint as well as some breakage and damage to the frames and sash was observed at
several locations. Most of the units are in-swinging casements and the original hardware and fittings exist in most locations. Some areas such as the bay window in the
north living room are in worse shape and in some locations wood members within the frame of the bay are either missing or rotted away. This should be repaired as soon
AGENDA / SCHEDULE as possible to prevent further decay immediately. This bay window and one on the south side of the house in one of the second floor bedrooms will need to be addressed
to prevent loss of these exterior elements. All windows will need to be scraped or stripped in place before refinishing and glass should be removed and reglazed. Some
CHARRETT PROCESS exchange about how this would be done and if some kind of insulating glazing system could be installed was discussed. Most of the group felt that because the glass and
OVERVIEW wood were generally in good shape that if some kind of insulation around windows is done it should be done on the interior as a clear, Plexiglas storm window system.
How this would affect the ability to open the windows should be looked at in conjunction with any mechanical system upgrades that might be undertaken. Caulking around
MEETING #1 windows would also need to be looked at both in terms of how the windows meet the stucco and brick openings but also in terms of what would be appropriate given the
WORKGROUP SESSIONS nature and approach to the exterior walls.
MEETING #2 Doors are generally original and in most places appear to be solid. In some areas doors are missing or have been removed such as the first floor north tower porch. It is
TECHNICAL EXPERTS possible that with further investigation the original doors can be either found and reinstalled or remade to match the original. All doors will need to be stripped and cleaned
before refinishing. In some cases hardware will need to be replaced or upgraded depending on security and locking systems that may need to be installed in the future. In
MEETING #3
several doorways screen doors have been added and in some cases these may date back to the early 20th century. Few of the windows have screens due to the in-swing
PROPERTY EXPERTS
casements but if any doors or windows are going to be operable in the future some investigation as to the historic and functional requirements should be made. Interior
doors where original should be kept and refinished. Where doors are missing or have been relocated or replaced, they should be replaced or remade to match.
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS Interior Walls and Ceilings
The interior walls of the house are plaster on lath. In some cases along the exterior walls the plaster appears to be applied directly to the brick exterior wall itself. In many
APPENDIX areas dropped ceilings or decorative metal ceilings have been installed. Our assumption is the either the plaster ceilings in many cases have fallen or been removed but
this could not be determined without further investigation. While significant damage was not observed, there were areas where paneling has been installed such as the
large auditorium room on the second floor and one can only assume that the plaster or brick dust observed on the window sill would suggest that the plaster if it exists in
this area is severely distressed or damaged and was covered over at some later date.

Knob and tube wiring was installed around the turn of the century and later upgraded and how this would be upgraded today would need to be looked at comprehensively
on a room by room basis.

Floors
The floors are generally wood on the interior at least in the original 1850 section. These are in good shape although they will need refinishing and some repair, Flooring in
some parts of the house such as bathrooms and kitchen would need to be studied as part of what might be the eventual reuse of these rooms.

Millwork
In several rooms millwork exists particularly in the dining room, living and sitting rooms and some upstairs bedrooms where it is original or added within the last 50 years.
Most of this is in good shape and would need cleaned repaired or repainted.
 MEETING #2 TECHNICAL EXPERTS MEETING
Observations (cont.)
Belmead on the James
Charrette Mechanical Systems
The existing mechanical system is currently cast iron radiators and consists of hot water driven from a central boiler in the basement. The boiler is said to be still working
although it was not investigated as to cracking or efficiency. Mike Hurd of Hurd & Obenchain made several recommendations that warrant further investigation. Assuming
that heating and air conditioning is installed in the future, options would include either a separate hot water heating system using radiators and a separate ducted cooling
system or a full replacement of the entire system either as an all air system split system using outside condensing units or cooling tower/chiller. An alternate would be to
AGENDA / SCHEDULE install a geothermal heating and cooling system using hydronic heat pumps and circulating pumps. This type of system has a higher first cost but has the advantage of
eliminating any outside equipment and the associated noise associated with chillers and condenser units. While this would eliminate the outside chillers and/or cooling
CHARRETT PROCESS tower, it would require a well field somewhere near by and a test well to determine the capacity and number of wells needed. It was generally agreed by all that this third
OVERVIEW option would be preferable if capital costs and a well field location could be identified. Heat pump units would be installed in the basement and would require piping to the
air handling units for hot and cold water as well as ductwork from the air handling units to floor and ceiling registers. The cost for a geothermal system would need to be
MEETING #1 evaluated on a life-cycle versus capital cost but all agreed this would be the best and least offensive solution.
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2 Electrical and Lighting Systems

TECHNICAL EXPERTS The current electrical service is not adequate for any future uses and will need to be replaced as part of any future renovation. We assume that 3 phase power is available
on property due to the size of the support needed for St. Francis but this would need to be confirmed by the power company. There are many receptacles and lighting
MEETING #3 fixtures that need to be replaced and upgraded to meet new energy codes. While this is not something that needs to be done immediately, a complete rewiring of the
PROPERTY EXPERTS Mansion would suggest that any new light fixtures and electrical devices including kitchen equipment should be energy star compliant to take advantage of cost savings in
the future. Panel boards will need to be upgraded and circuits replaced once a renovation plan is in place depending on the various uses. In addition there is no fire alarm
MEETING #4 system in place. In any renovation a joint fire/smoke alarm system and security system can be installed. To bring Belmead up to current code for residential or educational
RECOMMENDATIONS / use, a fire alarm and fire egress plan will need to be approved by the Fire Marshall. This will include new devices such as exit signs, strobes, pull stations etc. Due to the
NEXT STEPS high ceilings and the historic nature of the first floor areas, installation of a fire alarm system and associated life safety devices such as exit signs must be carefully
considered as part of any future renovations.
APPENDIX
 MEETING #2 TECHNICAL EXPERTS MEETING
Observations (cont.)
Belmead on the James
Charrette Plumbing Systems
The existing plumbing systems and fixtures are poor. New fixtures should replace existing in all areas with associated upgrades to the incoming domestic service and waste
lines. Future reuse of the building will determine the necessary fixture units required by code. It is likely that this will require the building to be considered an assembly use
in many spaces thereby requiring a higher than normal unit count. We understand that the septic system has not been upgraded for many years and this likely will need to
be expanded or a new field will need to be added.
AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
Fire Suppression Systems
Currently there is no fire suppression system in the Mansion. Renovation of the house would require that there is an approved sprinkler system for most residential or
OVERVIEW
educational uses outside a museum-type use. Given the historic nature of the house, this is something that must be carefully understood since the rules related to
MEETING #1 sprinkler systems require specific coverage. Our understanding is that there is at least one fire hydrant near the house that would be available in an emergency but the
WORKGROUP SESSIONS condition of this system has not been verified in the field. If a fire suppression system is installed it would require a storage tank and fire pump. In lieu of adding a storage
tank a suggestion was made to use the old pool as a water source but this would need renovation and cover for both safety and maintenance.
MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS Waste Water Treatment Systems
Currently the Mansion is served by a septic system and while the condition of the septic system could not be verified, it is our assumption that this system will need to be
MEETING #3 abandoned and a new septic system installed to meet the needs of any future use of the Mansion. Depending on the desire to add additional structures I the future on the
PROPERTY EXPERTS property, some investigation as to an alternate sewage treatment system might be considered. However, due to the upfront costs and maintenance of such a system, this
would be something that should be considered only if required by code. County requirements related to septic fields and installation of appropriate systems should be
MEETING #4 understood as part of a larger property wide master plan to make sure a new location and size is appropriately sited and does not preclude future development or
RECOMMENDATIONS / conservation easements already in place.
NEXT STEPS
Phone/Data/Cable Systems
APPENDIX
Depending on future use of the Mansion, an upgraded phone system will be needed particularly if additional development is envisioned on site. Currently the site is served
by internet and phone and cell service is available. Condition of wiring and required upgrades to the current service is unknown at this time. Cabling and investigation into
a wireless network should be investigated as part of any future renovation.
 MEETING #2 TECHNICAL EXPERTS MEETING
Recommendations
Based on the conversations and opinions that were expressed during the Technical Charrette, the following recommendations were developed as part of a series of steps
Belmead on the James
that would need to be taken to start any renovation/restoration of the house. These will need to be resorted in terms of priority as more discussion and investigation is done
Charrette but represents some of the specific recommendations that came out of the charrette.

1. Complete a Comprehensive Building Documentation

A comprehensive approach to documentation of the house is needed. This would include basic plan, section, elevation drawings of the house itself in scale and in a format
AGENDA / SCHEDULE that would be useable by all required consultants and contractors. These would not be HABS drawings per se but a recordation of what exists today. Typically this would
be done by way of field measurements or by photogrammetry, a method of photographically documenting a building that can then be turned into architectural drawing files.
CHARRETT PROCESS We have contacted Peter Aaslestad to ask if he could shoot the buildings so that we have the information documented. The exterior and interiors should be shot at the
OVERVIEW same time and would in effect become a record of the house in its current state. These photographs can then be used to create accurate drawings both in plan and
elevation of the house and would become the working base files for any restoration work in the future.
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS
2. Repair Roof and associated Gutters and Parapets as soon as Possible
MEETING #2 Further investigation of the roof and the repairs needed to address the water issues needs to be done as soon as possible. We would recommend having a reputable
TECHNICAL EXPERTS roofing contractor come down to Belmead and make an assessment and proposal for a staged repair of the roof, gutters and flashings. Given that the current roof is
approximately 7,500 sf., this work would need to be done by scaffolding the house and would need to be done in concert with a mason who is knowledgeable and has
MEETING #3 experience working with complicated roof conditions such as parapet flashings, internal guttering and restoration brickwork and lime-based mortars and stucco. Pricing and
PROPERTY EXPERTS some estimate of approach and schedule should be included in the proposal. A second or third proposal should be sought to make sure that pricing is reasonable as this
will undoubtedly be a large and long job for anyone roofing company.
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS / 3. Inspect Windows/Determine Stabilization Needs and Recommended Restoration Method
NEXT STEPS To address the state of the windows and the approach to a solution for restoration, insulation, caulking and repair, we would recommend that a single window be removed
so that inspections can be made as to the connections to the masonry surrounds and it can be carefully stripped and restored. This may be able to be done in place if it
APPENDIX turns out that removal is unworkable but a series of decisions will need to be considered to make sure that the window once it is restored can be reinstalled in place. This
exercise will help to answer questions as to the procedures, techniques and costs related to a full restoration of all of the windows. The bay window will need special
consideration immediately since some of the woodwork is already missing and the window is open to the elements. Further investigation as to how to address the
immediate need to stop water infiltration and to stabilize if not repair the current bay window needs to be done now.

4. Open Select areas of Interior Ceilings to Inspect Structure

Some of the ceilings on the first and second floors will need to be opened up to verify the extent of structural damage that has occurred on the perimeter exterior walls.
This may also shed some light on how to handle repair or removal of later ceilings that have been installed over the years. This is particularly needed on the second floor
but should also be looked at in selected areas on the first floor.

5. Open Select areas of Interior Walls to Inspect Structure/Exterior Wall Masonry

Some investigation as to what is going on behind the paneling in the large auditorium room in the 1895 addition needs to be addressed. A section of paneling should be
removed to allow visual investigation of the original exterior walls in this area as well in other damaged areas of the house. Recommendations as to what specific repairs
should and can be made will need the input of a qualified plasterer and masonry contractor with experience in historic house construction and lime-based plaster and lath
systems.
 MEETING #2 TECHNICAL EXPERTS MEETING
Recommendations (cont.)
Belmead on the James 6. Complete a Historic Structures Report
Charrette A Historic Structures Report should be undertaken to address structural deficiencies and to identify stabilization and repairs that will be needed to prevent further settlement
and/or decay. This report should look at the entire structure and should be coordinated with the assessment of the roof structure in particular. From this report a phased
approach to repair and stabilization together with pricing can be addressed.

AGENDA / SCHEDULE
7. Pursue Historic Structures Tax Credits Application
Application for Historic Tax Credits should be investigated to address the value and methodology for approach to and requirements before beginning any work
CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW 8. Complete a Historic Paint Analysis
A historic paint analysis and report on lead-based paints should be considered.
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS 9. Complete a Hazardous Materials Analysis
A hazardous materials analysis should be undertaken to make assess the presence of asbestos, lead-based paint, and other toxic substances.
MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS
10. Complete a Mechanical Electrical and Plumbing Assessment
MEETING #3 A mechanical, electrical and plumbing audit and assessment should be done to address the replacement of systems throughout the house. This should be done in the form
PROPERTY EXPERTS of a report with recommendations as to proposed new systems, load requirements and renovation approach to make sure that both the systems and replacement can be
accommodated within the current historic envelope. This should include a design of the proposed systems at a Design Development level to establish a budget and
MEETING #4 approach consistent with historic preservation standards.
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS
11. Complete a Utilities Assessment and Survey
APPENDIX A utilities assessment and survey should be done to establish the need for sewage treatment and disposal in the future, domestic water source and demand, storm water
management and power distribution to the immediate site.
 MEETING #3 PROPERTY EXPERTS MEETING
DATE: March 30th, 2010
Attendees:
Belmead on the James Maynard Ball B+B
Charrette Paul Beckmann B+B
Tut Bartzen B+B
Sarah Cooleen APVA
Rob Nieweg NTHP
AGENDA / SCHEDULE Sr. Maureen FrancisEmma, Inc.
Catherine Gilliam National Parks Conservation Association
David Hurt Conservation Partners, LLC
CHARRETT PROCESS
William Winburn Winsong Development
OVERVIEW
Glenn Telfer Draper Aden, Civil Engineers
MEETING #1 Matt Overton Draper Aden, Civil Engineers
WORKGROUP SESSIONS Roger Courtenay AECOM
Jay Norman Norman Realty and BlueLine Conservation
MEETING #2 Davone Tines
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3 Group Discussion Recommendations

PROPERTY EXPERTS
Based on the conversations and opinions that were expressed during the Property Experts Meeting, Bartzen + Ball make the following observations:
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS / 1. Develop a Comprehensive Plan for the Buildings and Land
NEXT STEPS A comprehensive approach to how to deal with the land and the buildings must be considered going forward. Both are dependent on each other to establish a viable and
sustainable future for Belmead. The issue of what comes first is challenging since money is needed to plan and execute any proposal. The issue of the sale or lease of St.
APPENDIX Francis to an outside vendor was discussed and should be carefully reviewed to understand the ability to fund a renovation of the current structure and whether such a use
supports and is complimentary with the mission of FrancisEmma, Inc. However, this would only address a portion of the property if a successful negotiation was reached
and begs the question about a comprehensive approach to both conservation and preservation in light of income from the rest of the property.

2. Complete a Market Evaluation/Cost Model

As further investigation into the costs for renovating the Mansion and infrastructure is obtained, the options for what can be done with the Mansion and surrounding property
can be better understood. The idea of a Training Academy for Historic Preservation or something similar that combines education and hands-on training is an interesting
one but would require some research and market evaluation to determine cost models, accreditation and program development. However, even in the case of bringing an
outside contractor in to work on the Mansion, some upgrades of the infrastructure may be required. Adding to this the need to support some component for residential on-
site will require real estate and some kind of food service and the attendant labor involved to run such an operation.

3. Carefully Measure Cost of On-Site Sustainable Energy Options

The current state of the hydroelectric dam and the idea of resurrecting it should be looked into although the capital costs probably will be prohibitive. If other sources of
energy production or even a program for production of biofuels was to be considered, expertise from Dominion Power or another source would need to be consulted to
establish if a potential revenue source could be considered. It is our opinion that due to the location and the goals of FrancisEmma, Inc., this is probably not something that
will generate a lot of interest and may involve outside state and federal agencies such as the Corp of Engineers, the Department of Natural Resources and other
stakeholder groups. Even within the restrictions and covenants of the current 2007 Conservation Easement, this may not prove feasible.
 MEETING #3 PROPERTY EXPERTS MEETING
Recommendations (cont.)
Belmead on the James
Charrette
4. Explore Wetlands/Land-Bank Options
The idea of keeping Belmead in its current state i.e. undeveloped beyond what is there today might be evaluated within the context of establishing a wetlands/land bank
system which could take advantage of other aspects related to development within the larger Richmond metropolitan area/James River Watershed system. This is
something that has had a great deal of interest and support within the development community in Northern Virginia although it is somewhat visionary in that such a system
may not be in place to take advantage of today. An option that is available but would require significant legal and conservation consultants would be to set up
AGENDA / SCHEDULE FrancisEmma, Inc. as a regional wetlands bank.

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW 5. Pursue Public Funding or Private Foundation Funding
The existing forestry and equestrian activities are in place and non-competing with the idea of adding alternative sources of income. However, these two sources of income
MEETING #1 will not provide the adequate basis to do much in the way of preservation or other conservation measures and therefore must be seen as only self-sustaining business
WORKGROUP SESSIONS models. To affect a substantial change in the income stream to the property two things must happen:
MEETING #2
Belmead must expand its outreach and audience. This can be done using the internet and initiating a focused outreach, marketing and fundraising effort over
TECHNICAL EXPERTS
the next several months.
MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS Belmead must consider alternate means to increase income either through access to public funding or through private foundations to establish seed money to
explore options for education, alternate development opportunities, outright sale of land or some kind of for-profit, business strategy that can be put in place in
MEETING #4 the near future.
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS Both of these will require some investment of time and material to start and should be seen as an investment. There are no other alternatives that can be considered
sustainable long term and therefore action must be taken soon to make sure that forward progress is not lost.
APPENDIX
6. Complete a Comparative Institutional Model Study
Belmead should continue to explore other models that are already in existence and should investigate what other opportunities are available to meet the mission of
FrancisEmma, Inc. Contacting and visiting other institutions that share similar goals will identify the particular opportunities available at Belmead and those that are not
worth considering. FrancisEmma, Inc. should initiate such a study immediately and set a time limit in which to listen, learn and decide what other paths may be open to
Belmead.

7. Continue Student/Youth Involvement Opportunities

FrancisEmma, Inc. should reach out to young persons of all ages to take advantage of their intelligence, energy and enthusiasm. This is ongoing with the architectural
history and design studios at UVA and this should be continued. This is one audience that is both capable and could make a substantial difference to the current equation.
How this is done and what the message is should both support the current social, conservation and preservation initiatives that are the mission of FrancisEmma, Inc. and
the SBS. To that end we should all realize that the vision of St. Katherine is something that is still with us and can be an inspiration for the future. Additionally initiatives
related to establishing an education/recreation camp or institution on property has some interesting possibilities particularly in relation to inner city youth and faith-based
training and outreach

8. Develop a Clear Long Range Vision

FrancisEmma, Inc. must clearly and simply set an intentional vision for the property for the next fifty years that builds on the joint goals of learning, conservation and
preservation at Belmead.
 MEETING #4 RECOMMENDATIONS / NEXT STEPS
GROUP DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Belmead on the James
Charrette
1. What are the next steps moving forward that need to happen to make sure that momentum is
not lost? What kinds of things should happen as part of a short term and long term strategy
for the renovation and reuse of the property and Mansion?
AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
2. Is there a reasonable timeline that can address the short term and long term goals and what
OVERVIEW are the key milestones/markers for the renovation of the house and other activities that
MEETING #1 might be related to the larger property?
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2 3. Who should be involved in setting up an Advisory Board or Task Force for Belmead to deal
TECHNICAL EXPERTS
with issues of buildings, grounds, finance, administration and day to day decision making?
MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS Should this be a single entity or should it include a series of committees that report to an
MEETING #4
oversight Board of Trustees?
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 MEETING #4: RECOMMENDATIONS / NEXT STEPS
QUESTION #1 & 2 – GOALS/ACTIVITIES/TIMELINE
Belmead on the James SHORT TERM GOALS (1 YEAR)
Charrette

Building
Complete a Comprehensive Building Documentation
AGENDA / SCHEDULE Open Select areas of Interior Ceilings to Inspect Structure
Open Select areas of Interior Walls to Inspect Structure/Exterior Wall Masonry
CHARRETT PROCESS Complete a Historic Structures Report
OVERVIEW Complete a Hazardous Materials Analysis.
Complete a Mechanical Electrical and Plumbing Assessment
MEETING #1 Repair Roof and associated Gutters and Parapets as soon as Possible
WORKGROUP SESSIONS Inspect Windows/Determine Stabilization Needs and Recommended Restoration Method
Pursue Historic Structures Tax Credits Application
MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS Install Security System

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS
Property
Wetland and other tax related easements
MEETING #4 Land Lease/Sale Options
RECOMMENDATIONS / Infrastructure Inspection/Assessment
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX Planning
Strategic Plan Evaluation
Revisit and Expand Mission/Vision Statement
Cultural Landscape Plan
Competitive/Market analysis

Development
Communications Plan/Outreach Plan
Building Stabilization Fund Campaign
Endowment Fund Campaign
Grant & Government Funding
Institutional Partnership Development
 MEETING #4: RECOMMENDATIONS / NEXT STEPS
QUESTION #1 & 2 – GOALS/ACTIVITIES/TIMELINE
Belmead on the James MEDIUM TERM GOALS (2 - 5 YEARS)
Charrette

Building
Complete a Utilities Assessment and Survey
AGENDA / SCHEDULE Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing Systems Improvements
Complete a Historic Paint Analysis
CHARRETT PROCESS Ongoing Stabilization
OVERVIEW
Fire Suppression System
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS Property
MEETING #2 Land Lease/Sale Options
TECHNICAL EXPERTS Wetlands/Land Bank Options
New Sewer System/Septic Fields
MEETING #3 Renewable Energy Sources
PROPERTY EXPERTS New Buildings to Support On-Site Activities
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS / Planning
NEXT STEPS
Business Plan Development
APPENDIX
Master Plan

Development
Communications Plan/Outreach Plan
Strategic Plan Fund Campaign
Endowment Fund Campaign (ongoing)
Grant & Government Funding
Institutional Partnership Development
 MEETING #4: RECOMMENDATIONS / NEXT STEPS
QUESTION #1 & 2 – GOALS/ACTIVITIES/TIMELINE
Belmead on the James LONG TERM GOALS (5 - 10 YEARS)
Charrette

Building
Complete Restoration/Renovation of Mansion
AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
Property
OVERVIEW Roadway Circulation Upgrades
New Deep Creek Bridge?
MEETING #1 Utility System Upgrades
WORKGROUP SESSIONS New Buildings to Support On-Site Activities (ongoing)
MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS Planning
MEETING #3
Execute/Update Master Plan
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
Development
RECOMMENDATIONS / Communications Plan/Outreach Plan
NEXT STEPS Endowment Fund Campaign (ongoing)
Grant & Government Funding
APPENDIX Institutional Partnership Development
 MEETING #4 RECOMMENDATIONS / NEXT STEPS
QUESTION #3 – ADVISORY / OVERSIGHT ORGANZATION
Belmead on the James
Who should be involved in setting up an Advisory Board or Task Force for Belmead to deal
Charrette with issues of buildings, grounds, finance, administration and day to day decision making?
Should this be a single entity or should it include a series of committees that report to an
oversight Board of Trustees?
AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW Discussion Issues:
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS Who should be involved?
MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS What kind of structure should it have?
MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS
What will its relationship to FrancisEmma Inc. and the Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament be?
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW
Belmead on the James
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW
Belmead on the James
Charrette Property Size: 2,265.5 acres (2 parcels)

Belmead (St. Emma): 1,585 acres

AGENDA / SCHEDULE
Mount Pleasant (St. Francis de Sales): 680.5 acres
CHARRETT PROCESS Total 2265.5 acres
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS
Current Zoning: A1(Agricultural District)
MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS Permitted Uses:
MEETING #3 Agriculture uses
PROPERTY EXPERTS Livery Stables
MEETING #4 Single Family Detached Housing
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS Churches
APPENDIX
Greenhouses
Group Homes
Bed and Breakfast Homes
Public Schools

Easements: Conservation Easement of Approx. 1,000 acres which spans both land parcels
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW: LAND PARCELS
Belmead on the James
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
Belmead Parcel
TECHNICAL EXPERTS
1,585 acres
MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX

Mount Pleasant
680.5 acres
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW – WOODLANDS
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Belmead Mansion

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW - CIRCULATION
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Belmead Mansion

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW – LAND USE
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Belmead Mansion

THE LOWLANDS
AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2 THE UPLANDS

TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS
BELMEAD
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX

ST. FRANCIS
DE SALES

THE GATEWAY
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW – LAND USE
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Belmead Mansion

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW – LAND USE
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Belmead Mansion

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW – LAND USE
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Belmead Mansion

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW – LAND USE
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Belmead Mansion

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW – LAND USE
Belmead on the James Belmead Mansion
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Belmead Mansion

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW – PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT
Belmead on the James
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE Belmead Mansion

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX

268 Acres not in

Conservation
Easement
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW – LEASE AREAS
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Belmead Mansion

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 PROPERTY OVERVIEW – 2006 CONSERVATION EASEMENT
Belmead on the James
Charrette
Belmead Mansion

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 BELMEAD MANSION INFORMATION
Belmead on the James
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE

CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW

MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
 CURRENT INCOME SOURCES
(per the FrancisEmma, Inc. Financial Plan 2008-2013)
Belmead on the James
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE
•Agriculture: Farming and Equestrian activities
CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW
•Lease income from St. Francis de Sales
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS
•Income from use or lease of Belmead Mansion
MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3 •Forestry: Select cut / thinning of Loblollies, seed tree cut

PROPERTY EXPERTS

MEETING #4 •Donations (general and designated)

RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX
•Interest on Savings Account and Endowment Account

•Easement Income: Conservation Easement on Acreage

•New Ventures and Ministries

 ADDITIONAL INCOME SOURCES BEING CONSIDERED
(per the FrancisEmma, Inc. Financial Plan 2008-2013)
Belmead on the James
Charrette

Increased/new user fees for existing On-Property activities:

•Increase in land use fees (Agriculture/Equestrian)
AGENDA / SCHEDULE
•Increase building lease/rental activity (Belmead, Granary,St. Francis de Sales)
CHARRETT PROCESS
OVERVIEW
Additional Property Easements:
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS •Place additional land in easement
MEETING #2 •Place an historic easement on the Belmead building
TECHNICAL EXPERTS

MEETING #3 New On-Property activities

PROPERTY EXPERTS
•Green Cemetery
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
•Canoe Landing
NEXT STEPS •Camping
APPENDIX •Bottled Spring Water
•Initiate ministry which generates income
•Fish & Wildlife training center
•Non-timber forest products

Other Income Sources

•Support from large donor
•Grants & other monetary incentives
•Sell building lots
•Partner with developer
 PRELIMINARY MANSION RESTORATION COST ESTIMATE
GSF Budget Subtotal
Belmead on the James A. Belmead Mansion Restoration (est.)
Charrette First Floor 7,960 x $300 $2,388,000
Second Floor 7,831 x $300 $2,349,300
Subtotal $4,737,300

AGENDA / SCHEDULE B. Belmead Mansion System Upgrades

HVAC (Assumes Hydronic Cooling/Heating with forced air distribution and geothermal well system)
CHARRETT PROCESS First Floor 7,960 x $60 $477,600
OVERVIEW Second Floor 7,831 x $60 $469,860
Subtotal $947,460 General Notes:
MEETING #1 Plumbing
WORKGROUP SESSIONS First Floor 7,960 x $3 $23,880 •2007 Assessment of Belmead Property was approx. $16M. Real
Second Floor 7,831 x $3 $23,493
estate market has since dropped.
MEETING #2 Subtotal $47,373
TECHNICAL EXPERTS Automatic Sprinkler
First Floor 7,960 x $4 $31,840 •Projected costs are based on Hiring a Qualified Restoration GC
MEETING #3 Second Floor 7,831 x $4 $31,324 and pursuing a full restoration of the house in a phased plan.
PROPERTY EXPERTS Subtotal $63,164
Lighting/Power Distribution •Site Infrastructure assumes that the Mansion will be used by
MEETING #4 First Floor 7,960 x $12 $95,520
RECOMMENDATIONS / Second Floor 7,831 x $12 $93,972
multiple groups in a conference center setting.
NEXT STEPS Subtotal $189,492
Fire Alarm •Comparative Restoration Pricing Models include:
APPENDIX First Floor 7,960 x $5 $39,800 •Montpelier Mansion $20M
Second Floor 7,831 x $5 $39,155 •Morven Park $8M
Subtotal $78,955 •(Add additional models at Meeting w/ NTHP help)
Subtotal All Systems $1,326,444
Grand Total Restoration and System Upgrades $6,063,744
•Comparative Conference Center Pricing Models include:
C. Site/Infrastructure Improvements •Montpelier C4C Phase II: 60 -100p(renov) $20M or $200K/p
Parking (Assumes 100 cars) 100 x $1,800 $180,000 •USFWS NCTC: 150-200p(new) $80M or $320K/p
Road Improvements LS $500,000
3 Phase Power (Optional?) LS $500,000
New Septic for 100 persons LS $100,000
New Well(s) and Piping LS $50,000
Landscaping LS $250,000
Subtotal All Site/Infrastructure $1,580,000

Grand Total All Improvements $7,643,744

 SPACE PROGRAMMING / CONSTRUCTION COST INFORMATION
Belmead on the James
Charrette

AGENDA / SCHEDULE
Academic/Retreat or Conference Center
CHARRETT PROCESS Notes: Assumptions include all new construction. Mid-level (2 star) accommodations in rustic setting using the Belmead Mansion as the
OVERVIEW Student Center for the campus. This does not include infrastructure costs. Comparable costs based on Montpelier Center for the
Constitution. (Room and Board Charges average $175/p to $200/p per night. This would not include program costs but would include
MEETING #1
WORKGROUP SESSIONS continental breakfast, lunch and dinner.)

MEETING #2
TECHNICAL EXPERTS Housing 400sf per person
Academic/Support 120sf per person
MEETING #3
PROPERTY EXPERTS Dining/Common Area 54sf per person
Total Programming Space Required Per Person 574sf
MEETING #4
RECOMMENDATIONS /
NEXT STEPS

APPENDIX Assume 50 participants 28,700 GSF x $200/GSF = $5,740,000 (to $10M)

Assume 100 participants 57,400 GSF x $200/GSF = $11,480,000 (to $20M)

Assume 200 participants 114,800 GSF x $200/GSF = $22,960,000 (to $30M)