Danville Preservation League

Danville Preservation Summit - Sept. 8

APVA-Preservation Virginia has placed the Entire City of Danville on their annual 11 Most Endangered Historic Sites in Virginia List. Though inclusion on that List will bring much-needed attention to efforts intended to preserve Virginia’s historic landmarks, APVA feels that, in Danville’s case, more than publicity is needed to preserve the essential character of the City.  To that end, APVA will convene a Preservation Summit, joined in that effort by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, with support from the Preservation League and many other local organizations.

The Preservation Summit will be held on Saturday, September 8, 2007.  For additional information and registration, please visit the Danville Preservation League's Home Web Site.

Long Mill hearing set for this afternoon

Danville Register and Bee

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

The city’s request for a declaratory judgment in the Long Mill case is scheduled to be heard this afternoon. The city has asked the court to determine if the Danville Historical Society has an ownership claim to a small portion of the complex.

The society is trying to get the city to halt the deconstruction of the Long Mill complex. The society said a deed transfer gives them a say in the matter.

The hearing is set for 1 p.m.

Check back for further details and read the full story in Thursday’s Register & Bee.   

Downtown trolley service set to begin

By DENICE THIBODEAU

Register & Bee staff writer

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Downtown Danville has been through a massive redevelopment effort over the past four years, and now it’s ready to show off the results with free Saturday trolley tours.

The trolley tours will begin Aug. 18 and run every Saturday, from 9 a.m. until 1:45 p.m., through Oct. 6. Geared toward attracting shoppers to the downtown area, the rides originate at the Community Market on Craghead Street and will stop at five locations in the downtown area.

Once the trolley leaves the Community Market, its first stop will be at Craghead and Patton streets, right next to the newly opened Lou’s Antique Mall. The trolley will then travel up Main Street, stopping at Floyd Street across from Rippe’s Shoes before heading to its next stop at Ridge and Patton streets, in front of Dixie Bags & More.

The trolley also will stop at the Museum of Fine Arts & History before turning around at Mount Vernon United Methodist Church and retracing its route back to the Community Market.

Rides will leave the Community Market every half hour with the final trip at 1:30 p.m.

“We hope this will further promote all these downtown revitalization efforts that are going on presently, and are just real pleased we’ve been asked to provide this service,” said Marc Adelman, the city’s transportation services director.

Reviving downtown
The goal is to attract more shoppers to downtown.

“This is a wonderful opportunity for people to come downtown, shop and see that downtown is thriving,” said Anne Moore, redevelopment coordinator for the Community Development Department.

Moore and Liz Sater, redevelopment project assistant, have been working for four years to rejuvenate the downtown area.

“Over the last four years, we’ve improved 48 storefronts. Now we’re more concentrating on filling those storefronts with quality tenants,” Moore said. “Now we’re at a point where we have two new anchors (Dixie Bags & More and Lou’s Antique Mall) and some quality businesses downtown. We can bring shoppers in for these tours that would not have been possible without the merchants stepping up to the plate and the Downtown Danville Association stepping up to the plate. All the players are coming together and it’s just real exciting.”

Moore and Sater both said the trolley route will solve many problems for downtown visitors.

“When you drive through Main Street, you have to watch traffic, traffic signals and pedestrians, so you don’t get a chance to look (at the businesses),” Sater said.

Adding ‘charm’
The merchants also are looking forward to the trolley tours.
“I think the trolley is a really good idea,” said Michelle Bender, co-owner of Dixie Bags & More. “It’ll add charm to downtown shopping. Shopping should be more than just shopping, it should be a fun time, and the trolley will be a part of that fun time.”

Her husband and co-owner, Gary Bender, agrees.

“The city’s already bought it (the trolley) and they need to use it. This is the way to use it, to incorporate some stops along the way of interesting places and to get people to realize what a little gem we have,” he said. “We have a wonderful museum, and some wonderful stores and places to eat.”

Lou Ogden, co-owner of Lou’s Antique Mall, said she is excited to see the trolley service beginning.

“What an exciting feature to bring to the city,” she said. “Oh, yes, we want it! It’s so wonderful to see the area growing!”  Steve Driskill, co-owner of River City General Store, said he hopes the idea keeps growing.

“I hope two months (of the trial service) grows into six months, then a year,” Driskill said. “I think you’ll find ridership very positive.”

‘An easy sale’
The city purchased two trolleys in 2005, and they have been used for the Reserve-a-Ride program and as spare route buses when needed.

The price tag for the trolleys was $220,000, but federal funds covered approximately 80 percent of the cost, leaving the city and state each picking up approximately 10 percent of the cost.

Downtown merchants and the Downtown Danville Association are picking up 50 percent of the operating cost for the eight-week experimental shopping tours. At the end of the trial, decisions will be made about continuing and expanding the service.

“We think it will be an easy sale, because it answers two big questions for the merchants,” Sater said. “When customers say, ‘Where do I park?’ now they can easily park here (at the Community Market) where there’s ample parking. And they don’t have to walk up the Main Street hill … and don’t have to parallel park on the hill. It’s going to be a great solution for a lot of downtown shoppers.”

Why is the Long Mill being demolished

If City Council would be consistently proactive in its stance toward preservation, Danville wouldn’t face these eleventh-hour crises.

Danville Register & Bee Opinion
By DAN LATHAM

With all due respect to Danville City Council, (“Tourism Board joins Long Mill fight,” July 14, page A3), “preservationists” in this city do not believe that City Council “can do whatever it wants.”

This dismissive suggestion is insulting to me and to the people I know who are concerned about historic preservation in Danville. We are intelligent, well-educated, well- informed and are actively pursuing knowledge about preservation through researching the issues, talking with experts and asking questions.

Are City Council members doing the same? What we have heard repeatedly from City Council is that its hands are tied when it comes to saving structures — such as the Long Mill — from imminent destruction. If City Council would be consistently proactive in its stance toward preservation, Danville wouldn’t face these eleventh-hour crises.

Preservationists are fighting to save Danville’s architectural treasures for the future, not only because these structures are what comprise the uniqueness of this city, but also because preservation is a well-known, well-documented means of economic development, which reportedly has been the city's top goal for several years now.  As such, every member of Danville City Council should be actively engaged in these preservation efforts, yet council continues to sit back and watch its own administration actively work to demolish these and other landmark architectural treasures.  If the Long Mill is destroyed, Danville will lose an entire historic district.  The other major structure in that district — the White Mill — will lose rehabilitative tax credits, making its adaptive reuse unlikely and its destruction will almost certainly be assured.

When it comes to the Long Mill, City Council repeatedly insists that they, “can’t do anything.  It's privately-owned property.”  The ridiculousness of this statement speaks volumes.  It is only because of the actions of the city itself that this property is being demolished in the first place. City Council’s refusal to now get involved in the mess the city has created only serves to reinforce the evidence that the city is actively seeking to demolish this complex and has no desire to stop what they have started. That evidence is suggested in a number of documents released in a Freedom of Information Act request, including the city’s own plan to place a YMCA on the site of the Long Mill.

---

There are, in fact, many things that City Council can do. As a body, City Council could use its influence to persuade the Long Mill owners to change course. It can hold the hearing that the public requested at the June 5 council meeting. This hearing should include a full evaluation of the maintenance code violations that the city cited in its demolition order, and give an opportunity for engineers and experts to consider those findings. It should give a complete accounting of the cost-benefit analysis that the inspections official and owners performed in concluding that the buildings were not worth rehabilitating.

In addition, City Council itself needs to give a full accounting of what it has been doing toward preserving these buildings, as some members continue to claim to have done so without any tangible or public evidence of such actions.

Council needs to invite the Long Mill owners to answer questions as well. Should they fail to participate, it will speak volumes about their intent.

The council and the public also need to ask questions of its employee, City Manager Jerry Gwaltney, about why his words and his actions regarding the Long Mill appear to contradict one another.

Given the time and effort city employees have expended on the Long Mill, and the near total secrecy with which that work has been done, it's only right and proper that City Council and the public ask questions. The citizens of Danville have repeatedly expressed outrage over the back- room deals that have occurred in this city. We want transparency in government – and that’s something City Council should ensure.

---

To aid in the effort, here are just a few questions to which concerned citizens want answers.  One would hope that our elected officials would want to know as well:

• Why did the city vigorously cite the Long Mill owners for fire code violations when vacant buildings do not, per se, fall under the fire code standards? Why did Gwaltney use as an excuse for demolition that the fire chief kept telling him that the mill buildings “must come down” (City Council meeting, June 5), when buildings cannot be demolished for fire code violations?

• Why did Gwaltney say that he’s done everything in his power for the past year to save the Long Mill (City Council meeting, June 5) when there is clear evidence that he and one of the owners made an agreement more than a year ago that the owners would demolish the mill complex if a buyer wasn’t identified within a short amount of time (revealed in a FOIA request)?

• Why did Gwaltney falsely claim that he and City Council members could be sued if the Long Mill caught fire and someone was injured (City Council meeting, June 5); lack of liability confirmed by office of Virginia’s Attorney General? Why did Gwaltney fabricate a story about the city having warrants for the arrest of the six Long Mill owners (City Council meeting, June 5), yet the city has recently confirmed that no such warrants ever existed (FOIA request).

• Why did the owners request an inspection of the Long Mill complex on June 8, leading to its condemnation on June 12, when they a1already had demolition plans based on the bogus fire code violation argument?

Their timing flies in the face of their scheduled meetings with the National Trust, the Virginia Department of Historic Resources and APVA-Preservation Virginia for June 25. In addition, how is it that our state and national preservation experts’ collective opinion that there is no reason for the buildings to be razed and that the structures are absolutely repairable, is in direct contradiction to Gwaltney’s assessment of the buildings at the City Council meeting on June 19 and our inspections official’s recent action. Have City Council members arranged to tour Long Mill and get a first hand look? Have they talked to the inspections official and the experts from the National Trust and APVA-Preservation Virginia?

• Why did the owners fail to follow through with development of the Flour Mill when they had a complete, economically feasible plan and the money in hand to do it (FOIA request)? Replacing the roof after the tornado was a relatively small and easily accomplished “fix” for which the owners would have received tax credits. How did the owners intend to alter their redevelopment plans of the entire complex after the loss of these buildings, given that the restrictions on the property only allowed them to demolish 25 percent of the property?

• Why did the city ignore the ownership claims of the Danville Historical Society when issuing the demolition permit and the demolition order? The city has known since June 5 about the ownership question and is fully aware that it does not have the right to move forward without a court decision, yet it took a request for injunctive relief and a lawsuit in order for the city to admit this and ask the court for a ruling.

• Why has the city arbitrarily and capriciously cited the Long Mill structures for fire code and maintenance code violations when there are numerous other structures that do not stand in such relative isolation, which have the very same problems? Is the city aiding and abetting the owners in getting the Long Mill torn down despite the loss of economic opportunities for the city of Danville and the economic problems that would result from de-listing the Historic Mill District? Did the city even explore these important economic issues before their mad rush to demolition on these buildings?
Here’s your chance, City Council, not to do “whatever you want,” but to do the right thing and represent the citizens of Danville in getting answers.

Latham and his wife Sarah spent 18 months renovating 840 Main St. and moved into the restored house in 2005.

Editor’s note: Asked to comment about the bulleted portion of this column, Danville City Manager Jerry Gwaltney said in an e-mail, “The issues surrounding the Long Mill are currently in litigation and it is my policy to never comment on issues that are being litigated.”

Remarks to City Council -- August 7, 2007

Mr. Mayor, Mr. Vice Mayor, members of City Council, thank you for your time.  My name is Carla Minosh.  It is as a concerned citizen that I have asked that my statement be read for the record today.

On June 5th, 2007, City Manager Jerry Gwaltney addressed the City Council and the public on the matter of the Long Mill.  At that time he made a number of statements that I would like to address.

Statement No. 1

In regard to a June 29, 2006, letter of agreement between River Partnership, LLC – owners of the Long Mill – and David Eagle, then Fire Marshall, representative for the City: the agreement stated that the owners of the Long Mill had contracted with Mark Evans of Sotheby's International Realty to list the Long Mill property for sale for a period of nine months.  According to the agreement, if Mr. Evans was not successful in identifying a buyer within five months (no later than November 30, 2006), the owners stated that they would immediately accept bids from contractors to begin demolition no later than March 15, 2007.

At the June 5th Council meeting, Mr. Gwaltney stated that he met with Long Mill owners and a representative of Sotheby's, saying that the City "will take the attempt to give you [referring to the Long Mill owners] an opportunity to sell that property." He further stated of the Sotheby's listing that the owners "paid an exorbitant cost to do that."

I have several concerns about this statement.  First of all, an agreement between the City and owners of a private property whereby the owners will demolish their own buildings in lieu of a sale sounds like the City is getting involved in a private matter.  Hasn't the City and the City Council repeatedly said that it cannot get involved in matters of private property? At this point, the City Council can no longer ignore the City Administration's involvement in the Long Mill and therefore should, itself, become involved.

The second problem with Mr. Gwaltney's statement is not only that Mr. Gwaltney was wrong in his contention that the owners listed the property with Sotheby's International at great expense, but also that he disseminated this incorrect information at a City Council meeting and asked City Council and the public to rely on this information.

I spoke with Jay Lanigan of Sotheby's International who reported that after extensive searches and involvement with Sotheby's International IT department for confirmation, there is no record of any property in Danville having been listed with them during that time period.

As confirmation, I also spoke with Mark Evans, the individual mentioned in the June 29, 2006 letter as being the agent for Sotheby's International who purportedly listed the Long Mill property.  He told me that the Long Mill listing was put on hold, and was in fact never listed with his company.

If the Long Mill property was never listed for sale, the City should hold the owners to the original agreement to list the property and find a responsible buyer who will develop it in accordance with the protective covenants in the Deed.  The City Council and the people of this city need an answer to why this property was not listed as agreed, and the City Council needs to ensure than everything that can be done has been done to preserve this property before continuing on this course of demolition.

Statement No. 2

On June 5th, Mr. Gwaltney also stated that warrants had been issued for the arrest of the owners of the Long Mill.  He said "Let me tell you, that for many, many months, since last summer, the Fire Chief has had warrants for their arrest." "And I have held those up personally."

In fact, I made a FOIA request for a copy of those warrants.  The response I received from City Attorney Clarke Whitfield states "arrest warrants do not exist.  Arrest warrants do not exist because the Magistrate issues that documentation and to this date, the Magistrate has not issued any warrants."

Statement No. 3

Mr. Gwaltney also spoke about the liability of City Administration and City Council at the June 5th Council meeting.  He stated, "If something happens tonight, not only am I going to get sued, but you all probably are too [gesturing toward City Council members].  But I'm not going to carry that burden any longer."

He continued later: "And I'm not going to jail for anybody. No-one.  Nobody out there has to take that burden right now but me."

And again, he re-stated: "I want to emphasize again, I have carried this burden.  It is my job to carry that burden, if I make these types of decisions.  If something happens there today, if I don't support my people and do what they're supposed to do, I can be charged, and imprisoned for it if something happens."

A September 21, 1990, Virginia Attorney General opinion speaks directly to the issue of public official liability in cases such as this, and directly contradicts these claims by Mr. Gwaltney.  Perhaps he didn't know that he was not liable.  However, shortly after that Council meeting, a copy of the AG's opinion was forwarded to the City Attorney.  Mr. Gwaltney has not retracted those statements in public.

Each of these statements was made publicly by Mr. Gwaltney.  Each is incorrect and Mr. Gwaltney has made no effort to publicly correct these statements.  Therefore, I feel compelled to bring this matter up publicly. It is possible that Mr. Gwaltney was intentionally misleading the public and the City Council.  If the City Manager is deliberately misleading the Council and the public, he should be fired immediately.  Such behavior is totally unprofessional and unacceptable and it is imperative that City Council investigate this matter.

On the other hand, perhaps Mr. Gwaltney truly believes what he stated on June 5th.  If that is the case, then the City Manager as well as the City Council have based their decisions regarding the Long Mill on false information.

Given the importance of the decisions regarding the Long Mill, City Council should now go back and re-evaluate its own actions, as well as the actions taken to date by City Administration in light of this new evidence.  City Council must ensure that decisions which have been made about the Long Mill are being made with the most accurate information available, and in the interests of the people of Danville.

There is yet another statement made by City Manager Gwaltney on June 5th that I would like to mention.  He stated: "I have been told by the Fire Chief that we do not intend to send a fireman, and cannot conscientiously send a fireman into that building (referring to the Long Mill) if it catches on fire of significant burning, now that they know what they know."

Not only is this a most irresponsible statement to be made by a public official, but also it is outrageous.  How can the City Manager and Fire Chief – each sworn to protect the health and welfare of citizens of this City and to protect its structures and assets – say that they will not bother to use the fire department's maximum efforts to put out a fire, should it break out in that complex? How can the people of this City feel safe that any of their property will be protected with such public statements being made.  City Council needs to call for an immediate retraction and apology, as well as assurances from the Fire Chief as well as the City Manager that the Long Mill property will be protected.

This is especially critical, as it has recently become known that the contractor working on the demolition of the Long Mill, Martijn Van Zadelhoff, was also demolishing a Mill in March of 2005, which erupted into a fire that was so suspicious that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms was called in to investigate.

Mr. Mayor, Mr. Vice Mayor, members of City Council, again, I thank you for your time.

Variance Proposed for 503 Holbrook Avenue

Commercial Office zoning has been requested for the home at the corner of Holbrook Avenue and Green Street, just behind the Danville Museum of Fine Arts and History.  Both Holbrook Avenue and Green Street are presently residential in character. 

This property at 503 Holbrook is within the Old West End Historic District.  This district is seeing many conversions from commercial use back to residential, and nearly all district residents want this trend to continue.

This request for variance has been reviewed by the City's Planning Board, which has recommended against this change.  The request now goes to City Council, and will likely appear on the August 7, 2007, agenda.

The Danville Preservation League asks interested parties to express their opposition.  Citizens can appear at the Council meeting and / or write directly to Council members.  For a list of members and their e-mail addresses, please see Elected Officials.  When it is released, the Council's agenda will appear on the City web site at Regular Agendas.

Deconstructing Schoolfield Mill

By SUSAN ELZEY

Register & Bee staff writer

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Watch the video

Schoolfield Mill is being torn down one section at a time in an effort to recycle as many materials as possible. Julian Henderson (Register & Bee)

The recycling of history is occurring daily at the Schoolfield Mill buildings, as workers for Old Mississippi Brick Co. deconstruct the buildings, sending the bricks and heart pine to beautify homes throughout the country.

Dave Kleier, who is in charge of real estate and development, said the Holly Springs, Miss.-based company is trying to respect history, while making way for new development and economic growth.

“We are deconstructing because we have viable markets for the materials, and then the land will be available,” Kleier said Tuesday.

Gibbs International purchased the Schoolfield Mill complex from Dan River Inc. in March 2006.

Kleier said that Gibbs is selling the machinery and looms, but Old Mississippi Brick is reclaiming the other materials in an agreement he was not at liberty to discuss yet.

“We are green-friendly because we take the materials and recycle them and resell a piece of history,” Kleier said. “Along with that, we provide an avenue by keeping some buildings that allow businesses to move in the area.”

He said that between 90 and 95 percent of the materials on the site will be reused or recycled by the first of the year, with only the remaining 5 to 10 percent winding up in a landfill.

Even the granite sills of the mill buildings will be marketed and the broken bricks used for fill in other parts of the site.

Not wasting away

The crews have been working on the No. 4 Mill, which Kleier said is almost completely dismantled. Only about 35 people - a combination of Old Mississippi Brick employees and former Dan River employees - are working on the site.

“Once we get through No. 4, we will go into No. 4 Weave Room,” he said. “Then No. 1 Weave Room behind the office complex will be coming down, but the office complex will stay and be leased out.

“By the first quarter of 2008, the whole southwest corner will be leveled, and that particular property will be put up for sale and will be nice for development.”

Old Mississippi Brick sells bricks that are pulled off historic sites, such as in Danville, and makes handmade brick that is manufactured to look old.

“We also take the flooring and decking of old mills and remanufacture it into tongue and groove heart pine flooring,” Kleier said.

Resawing is actually being done on site on the bottom floor of Mill No. 5.

Kleier said that a lot of the wood was about 100 years old when it was put into the mill, which means the wood is actually 200 years old.

“I think that’s sort of cool,” he said.

Trying to be sensitive

With the future of the site still somewhat uncertain, Kleier said the company also is working on long-range plans with a local engineering firm to develop a master plan for the site that will balance the need for change without eradicating the history of the Schoolfield area.

“We are trying to be sensitive,” he said. “You can’t just let a mill sit; it will fall apart. Because the mill is one of the largest in the country, frankly, it’s an undertaking to look at what to do with it.”

The 90-acre site involves more than 4 million square feet of buildings.

Kleier said he has been impressed with the economic development people in Danville and their pro-active stance. He met with them early on in the project.

“We will be here on site for four to five years,” Kleier said. “Our goal is not to level the buildings, such as the No. 5 Mill. It is all concrete, and there is no inherent value in taking it down.”

The office complex behind No. 1 Mill also will remain standing and be leased out, as well as the Cloth Hall building, which will be kept for redevelopment purposes.

Kleier said no decision has been made yet as to whether the smokestacks will come down.

“Leaving smokestacks up actually helped me sell a site in South Carolina,” he said.

Although there are no plans to sell directly to the community, bricks and heart pine from the Danville mill may be purchased through the company’s office in Mississippi.

“It’s sort of a Pollyanna thinking,” Kleier said. “I have talked to a lot of people and, being an outsider, it was interesting to watch the Schoolfield Recreation Center struggle and the emotions that went along with that and Long Mill, and trying to maintain a balance.

“But practically, you just can’t leave everything, but what you do is balance history, redevelopment and bringing jobs back in to the area.”

For more information on Old Mississippi Brick Co., go to www.oldmississippibrick.com.

Long Mill Demolition – Another "Done Deal"

Please see this compilation of City documents, deeds, and articles regarding the Long Mill on our home web site.  You may return to this blog to post comments if you like.

City weighed Long Mill for YMCA site

By MAC McLEAN

Register & Bee staff writer

Sunday, July 22, 2007

City officials admit that the current site of the Long Mill buildings was their top pick to house a new 64,000-square-foot YMCA, but they deny this decision has anything to do with the complex’s demolition.

City Planning Director Ken Gillie conducted a site plan study for a potential new YMCA facility in October 2006. He recommended the current site of the Long Mill complex on Riverside Drive, the old Blackwell Motors property on Memorial Drive and the old Piedmont Mills building on Cahill Court.

“We get requests all the time from people who are looking for space,” Gillie said Thursday, adding his office is often approached by businesses and other organizations looking to locate in Danville. “They said pick some spots and I picked these three.”

All three sites Gillie suggested matched the YMCA’s core criteria: It had to be on the banks of the Dan River, located near an existing city-owned recreational facility and centrally located within the city limits.

The Long Mill site made the top of Gillie’s list because it was in a highly visible location and easily accessible from Riverside Drive, the Union Street Bridge and the Riverwalk Trail.  It also had all of its utilities connected and was on “relatively level” ground, according to the report.

But the Long Mill site also had its problems.

The report claimed that it was the lowest of the three suggested sites and would have the greatest impact on the Dan River’s floodplain. It also referenced a potential “citizen outcry” that could occur if any of the Long Mill complex’s buildings were demolished.

Gillie said his report was in no way related to the Long Mill’s current demolition, which started June 25, and that he hasn’t heard anything from YMCA officials since he drafted the document almost nine months ago.

He said he last met with YMCA Executive Director Sarah Folmar in October 2006 when he picked up a floor plan for the Myrtle Beach, S.C., YMCA to use as an example for his report.

This facility has an 8-lane Olympic-sized pool, three small and one regulation basketball courts, therapy and wading pools, eight offices, two locker rooms and a juice bar among its features. Gillie said he could fit in on about half of the Long Mill site’s 24.8 acres.

“We are interested in building a new facility sometime down the road,” Folmar said Thursday, adding any site plan discussions must have taken place before she started her job in October 2006. “A new YMCA is needed in Danville.”

But any initiative to build a new facility is still in the planning stages for now. Folmar said the Danville YMCA is conducting extensive market research studies as the organization drafts a comprehensive three-year plan set to be released in January 2008.

“It’s all based on community needs,” Folmar said, adding that any future programs or projects would also be based on the YMCA’s ability to get support from individual donors and foundations.

Old 97 Museum in the Long Mill

Here is a sketch I came across that was included in the first draft of the original proposal of the Old 97 Museum in 1999 (click to enlarge).  The final document depicted the Chapel in the architect's Museum floor plan that I originally sketched.

The idea was that since there are living descendants of the wreck victims, it would be only fitting that a special area of the museum be dedicated to them. The floor plan placed the Chapel directly opposite an second entrance, allowing Chapel visitors privacy, if so desired.

Ric Scott
Danville