In an Environmental Assessment determined the existing school infrastructure was no longer viable as the U.S. Army Southeastern Signal School transitioned into a Cyber School. Demolition, renovation and new construction was identified as the preferred alternative and Section 106 consultation resulted in a Memorandum of Agreement stipulating Heritage Documentation Programs documentation, to be prepared prior to demolition. Field work and photography of the subject property were conducted in January The project was sponsored by the Directorate of Public Works, Fort Gordon, Georgia.1 PART I. Historical Information A. Physical History 1. Date of establishment: 2. Landscape architect, designer, shaper, creator: Edward L. Daugherty Landscape Architect.
Edward Daugherty is recognized as an influential practitioner of landscape Modernism in the southern United States in the mid-twentieth century. His interest in architecture and landscape was catalyzed as a teenager, first studying at the Georgia Institute of Technology, before serving in the U.S. Army during World War II. He obtained a Bachelor of Landscape Architecture and Master of Landscape Architecture from Harvard University in A more focused interest in landscape planning developed after studying in England. Daugherty returned to practice in Atlanta, where his design philosophy evolved away from traditional revival design schemes that had characterized southern landscapes for decades.
His prolific career includes commissions for residential gardens, corporate clients, parks, schools, and cemeteries. Architect, builder, contractor, laborers, suppliers: Aeck Associates, Atlanta, Georgia. Richard Aeck received his Bachelor of Science in architecture from the Georgia Institute of Technology in He was a consulting architect in the and also designed educational facilities throughout Georgia, including university buildings in Augusta and Statesboro. By the mid-1950s, Aeck's work was published and recognized for design excellence and innovative engineering.
Aeck was known for expressing structure through the design of his buildings, a tradition he continued in his work at the Fort Gordon Signal School.2 1 Directorate of Public Works, Fort Gordon Supplemental Environmental Assessment. March 2 Craig, Robert M. Richard Aeck Accessed from the New Georgia Encyclopedia. 29 September at
No. GA-6 (Page 3) 3. Original and subsequent owners, occupants, uses: U.S. Army, Fort Gordon; facility has only functioned as a training school. 4. Builder: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District. 5. Original plans and construction: Directorate of Public Works, Fort Benning, Georgia. 6. Periods of development (landscape): a. Original plans and construction: Landscape Plans, East 175A-A-157, East 175B-A- East 175C-A-159. All plans dated implemented b. Changes and addition: No design changes have occurred, aside from the installation of the flagpole plaza around A review of the original planting scheme and drawings reveals a slightly greater concentration of trees and plantings than is evident today.
Some trees and grass have deteriorated from lack of maintenance, or have been removed at unknown times. B. Historical Context: Fort Gordon Development Georgia established many war-training camps during World War I. Chamblee, northeast of Atlanta, was selected for one of the state's largest army cantonments. It was named Camp Gordon in honor of John Brown Gordon a major general in the Confederate army, a Georgia governor and U.S. senator.3 The camp opened in July and was decommissioned after the war.4 Camp Gordon was approved for the reconstruction of a new training area near Augusta and formally established on 18 October Although facilities were incomplete, on 17 December the 4th Division arrived at Camp Gordon for combat training from Fort Benning, Georgia.
The design of the cantonment followed the standard U.S. Army Quartermaster plans of a large parade field surrounded by wooden World War II temporary buildings (Figure 1). The cantonment, located in the northeastern portion of the installation, was separated into distinct 3 John Brown Gordon, New Georgia Encyclopedia. Accessed 7 September at 4 The New Georgia Encyclopedia, World War I in Georgia: Federal Installations and War Camps. Accessed 29 September at FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No.
GA-6 (Page 4) areas: the administrative/community area on the eastern edge of the parade field, the station hospital in the northeastern area, barracks compounds to the north and south of the parade field, recreational facilities on the western edge of the parade field, and a warehouse/maintenance area at the far west and separated from the main cantonment by McCoy s Creek. The post was home to three divisions during the war: the 4th Infantry, the Infantry, and the Armored. From October to January Camp Gordon served as an internment camp for foreign prisoners of war. From May until April the U.S. Army Personnel and Separation Center processed nearly personnel for discharge from the Army.5 On 21 March Camp Gordon became a permanent Army post and was re-designated as Fort Gordon.
The original layout of the World War II era cantonment remained essentially intact until the mid-1960s (Figure 1). Development of the Southeastern Signal School Campus: A major reorganization at Fort Gordon occurred in June The Third United States Army re- designated the U.S. Army Garrison at Fort Gordon as the U.S. Army School/Training Center, Fort Gordon. The U.S. Army Signal Training Center became the U.S. Army Training Center, Signal, and basic training was re-designated the U.S. Army Training Center, Infantry. By the end of Fort Gordon contained the U.S. Army School/Training Center, the U.S. Army Hospital, the U.S. Army Civil Affairs School, the U.S. Army Military Police School, and the Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory and the U.S. Army Southeastern Signal School. The U.S.
Army Signal Corps traces its beginning to the eve of the American Civil War, when effective communications were essential to success on the mid-nineteenth century battlefield. Major Albert J, Myer established the Signal Corps in and set up a temporary school at Fort Monroe, Virginia to teach military communications. By the telegraph introduced electronic communications, drastically altering military strategy and tactics. The need for electronic communications expanded exponentially as technology continually progressed and by the height of the Cold War in the early multiple locations were need to train Signal School officers. Fort Gordon was chosen for a southeastern campus to complement training in the northeast at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey. 6 5 Ibid.
6 For a complete history of the Signal Corps, reference Getting the Message Through: A Branch History of the U.S. Army Signal Corps by Rebecca Robbins Rains, Center for Military History, United States Army, Washington, FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No. GA-6 (Page 5) The newly formed Southeastern Signal School at Fort Gordon was temporarily housed in World War II temporary buildings spread throughout the northern side of the cantonment while a permanent campus was designed and constructed. Located to the north of Chamberlain Avenue and to the west of the WWII post hospital was a series of World War II-era motor pools that had served the company areas to the south of Chamberlain Avenue.
This area was relatively flat, already had water and sewer service, and was close to the center of the cantonment of Fort Gordon. This area was chosen to house the new Southeastern Signal School (Figures 2 and 3). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District let a contract in to Aeck Associates of Atlanta, Georgia, with Richard Aeck as principal architect for the master plan of the new Southeastern Signal School campus and its associated buildings. Zimmerman, Evans & Leopold of Atlanta, Georgia, provided the engineering services. Landscape design services were contracted to Edward L. Daugherty. The Signal School landscape at Fort Gordon was among his collaborations with Richard Aeck that included the Peachtree House/Consolidated Equities Building in Atlanta.
In spite of this association, in a lengthy oral interview Daugherty did not mention his work with Aeck but discussed other partnerships with prominent Atlanta architects.7 Richard Aeck received his Bachelor of Science in architecture from the Georgia Institute of Technology in He was a consulting architect for a university in Cambodia under the government of Prince Norodom Sihanouk in the and designed educational buildings throughout Georgia, including university buildings in Augusta and Statesboro.
Aeck was known for expressing structure through the design of his buildings and he continued this tradition in the design of the Southeastern Signal School.8 On 16 October construction began on a contract for Phase I for the six, two-story signal-instruction classrooms designed by Aeck (Figures 5 and 6). They were: Allen Hall - classroom Hazen Hall - classroom Greely Hall - classroom Fisher Hall - classroom Johnston Hall - classroom Saltzman Hall - classroom 7 The Cultural Landscape Foundation - Pioneers of American Landscape Design, Edward L. Daugherty oral History Interview, June Atlanta, GA, Charles Birnbaum, FASLA, FAAR, Spencer Tunnell, ASLA, James Sheldon and Shirley Veenema, pp. Accessed 12 March at: 8 Craig, Robert M. Richard Aeck FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No.
GA-6 (Page 6) Phase I of the Signal School opened on 1 June The initial six classroom buildings were equipped with the latest in sophisticated Cold War era communication and electronics for training Signal soldiers. Ground was broken on 4 August for Phase II, which included the Signal School Towers complex and four other signal-instruction classroom buildings which opened in and Allison Hall - classroom Burkhart Hall - classroom Nelson Hall - classroom Stansell Hall - classroom Signal Towers Complex (Signal Towers - administrative, Alexander/Olmstead Hall-auditoria, and Conrad Hall-library. Although the three structures have independent names, they are physically connected and designed as a single, unified complex.
By the end of Phase I and II were complete - the Signal School had 14 buildings. There was one last major expansion of the Signal School, Phase III, in Brant Hall - classrooms and workshops Moran Hall - classroom Aeck s conceptual master plan for the Signal School proposed a campus of Modernist design, with buildings appearing to float in large, grassy open areas facing Chamberlain Avenue (Figure 4). The bold architectural statement was to be constructed in three phases and drew from several devices common to New Formalism, a variant of Modernism that blended contemporary materials and styling with classical symmetry and traditional features.
New Formalism was an architectural style that emerged in the United States in the and continued through the Used in high profile, monumental civic and institutional buildings, it employed elements such as columns, colonnades and entablatures using classical proportion and scale that often set buildings on a podium within a formal landscape. New Formalism used emerging construction technology of mid-twentieth-century America, employing distinctive forms such as umbrella shells, waffle slabs and folded plates. Strict symmetry, smooth wall surfaces and subtle details are also hallmarks of New Formalism.9 9 Wikipedia. New Formalism (architecture). Accessed 2 September at FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No.
GA-6 (Page 7) The Signal School reflects many of these details and subtleties (Figures Organized around several open grassy areas, the campus 13 buildings have the following character- defining features in common: - Monumental in scale - Buildings appear to float on the landscape or set on a podium - Rectangular massing (except for the triangular Brant Hall) - Flat roofs - Brick veneer forming large expanses of smooth surfaces - Exposed structural system of distinctive waffle slab concrete - Delicacy of details such as brushed aluminum architectural lettering for signage, overhanging eaves with perforations in the waffle slab for light/shadow effects on the brick veneer The Signal School embodies many of the major hallmarks of New Formalism (Figures 7, 8, 9).
The complex is set on a podium, with 3 buildings joined by waffle slab colonnades. The strictly symmetrical classroom buildings float on the flat formal landscape. Smooth expanses of masonry, geometric forms, and delicate details such as lighting fixtures embrace the style. Although the Army often used historical styles such as Neo-Classicism for educational facilities to project America s role as a world power, the Signal School made a clear statement about the its investment in emerging technology. Rejecting historical precedents during the Cold War, the Army chose the modernity of New Formalism to represent its educational center for electronics and communications.
The western side of the Signal School campus was to be anchored by a main administration building complex (Signal Towers Complex) consisting of an 11-story tower (Signal Towers), a large auditorium (Alexander Hall) combined with a smaller one (Olmstead Hall), and a library (Conrad Hall, which was later converted to the Signal Museum (Figure 9). All were connected to each other with a concrete waffle slab roofed walkway over an outdoor plaza (Figure A large parking lot to the west of these buildings was installed for use by the staff of the buildings. Landscape Design The grounds of the Signal School are barely detectable as a designed entity. Lack of maintenance and loss of many trees and plantings has compromised the original planting plan, creating a more open landscape.
However, much of the progressive imprint of Edward Daugherty s pedestrian- focused design for the campus remains and echoes many of the leading Modernist practitioners of the mid-twentieth century who influenced his work. FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No. GA-6 (Page 8) At the end of the nineteenth century through World War II, the built environment began to reflect the new technology that had revolutionized the construction world and produced a variety of building efficiencies. In spite of these structural changes, architects clung to historic precedents of style and design, and their creations had the outward appearance of earlier decades.
During this period, the landscape profession also followed traditional designs, as gardens and plantings were mostly laid out with symmetry and formality.10 After the World War II, the impact on society of many of these new technologies came under scrutiny. For one, the war had cast a sobering light on the destructiveness of new weaponry, made even more potent by the onset of the nuclear era.
A growing awareness of these machines capacity to offer both good and bad outcomes refocused concern for the environment and a closer relationship with the natural world.11 Although the first seeds of natural resource conservation did not fully germinate until the environmental movement of the late the effects were felt in many disciplines in the mid- twentieth century, and most visibly in the arts, architecture, and landscape architecture professions.12 Buildings began to shed tradition and took on irregular, naturalistic forms that defied academic interpretation, and the surrounding grounds responded to complement the new Modernism. Edward Daugherty s career began in earnest after the war, as new landscape ideas permeated design schools throughout the world.
At Harvard University, he was particularly influenced by the philosophies of Garrett Eckbo, Dan Kiley, and James Rose. Eckbo adopted high minded principles of social justice and environmental sensitivity, eschewing design work for wealthy clients. He integrated social values into his work on a landscape for migrant farm worker housing in California, professing that all sectors of society should find quality in their community infrastructure.13 Daugherty s sympathies for social justice compelled his interest in the human scale of the landscape and the natural qualities of the environment. Increasingly, he sought to reduce the presence of the automobile and elevate the pedestrian experience.
These values had no doubt been honed in his urban planning experiences in London, and served him well as he began work in car- 10 The Modern Movement in Landscape Design: Precepts, legacies and challenges, John Byrom (Former Director of the Master of Landscape Architecture Programme / Honorary Fellow University of Edinburgh). Accessed 1 December at 11 Ibid. 12 LAND 8 Five Modernist Landscape Architects. Accessed 1 December at 13 Ibid. FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No. GA-6 (Page 9) dominated Atlanta.
His Harvard training made him a strong advocate for Modernist influenced landscapes, and he became a major practitioner of the movement in the American southeast.14 As the city s tall skyscrapers crowded around his urban projects, he sought ways to maximize natural light, de-emphasize parking lots, and create urban retreats from the concrete environment. These efforts are demonstrated in his use of space for Canterbury Court at Atlanta s All Saints Episcopal Church; and Agnes Scott College; the Georgia governor s mansion; and the Atlanta History Center. Other prominent commissions included the Atlanta Botanical Garden, Coca-Cola Headquarters, Emory University, and the Georgia Institute of Technology.
15 Daugherty tried to impart the feeling of a car-free zone in many of his projects, and prioritized pedestrian circulation through the use of curvilinear pathways and accent vegetation. The History Center in Atlanta exemplifies his use of landscaping components to disguise parking lots where he employed a substantial berm to hide a distant parking structure.16 This practice is also evident at Fort Gordon s Signal School where parking is confined to a large area near the towers, but spatially subordinate to the rest of the campus facility and landscape. Beyond the parking lot, cars seem mostly absent and pedestrian circulation takes over.
Consistent with Daugherty s penchant for walkable communities, the Signal School s commanding buildings and expansive grounds were made more cohesive by a series of connecting sidewalks framed by accent vegetation and low level plantings to lend personal scale.17 Likewise, landscaped courtyards in each of the classroom buildings offered sheltered space and quiet retreat. These provisions mitigated the non-human dimension of the Signal Towers, where a multi-story building dominated the campus just as the skyscrapers that darkened Atlanta streets.
Daugherty was not interested in assigning labels to his design approach, though he is most often associated with Modernism.18 For this reason, his work at Fort Gordon is not easily identified with New Formalism, as are Richard Aeck s highly symmetrical buildings. 14 Daugherty is quoted in, Current retrospective celebrates local landscape architect Edward L. Daugherty - The Atlanta History Center looks back at some of Daugherty's most important designs of the last 50 years. 15 A list of Daugherty s drawings held at the Kenan Research Center can be found at the Atlanta History Center Finding Aids, obtained 24 November at: and 16 Current retrospective celebrates local landscape architect Edward L.
Daugherty - The Atlanta History Center looks back at some of Daugherty's most important designs of the last 50 years. 17 Ibid. 18 The Cultural Landscape Foundation - Pioneers of American Landscape Design. Edward L. Daugherty oral History Interview, June Atlanta, GA, Charles Birnbaum, FASLA, FAAR, Spencer Tunnell, ASLA, James Sheldon and Shirley Veenema. Accessed 12 March at FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No. GA-6 (Page 10) Regardless, Daugherty s landscape design harmonized well with the theme established in the campus architecture. For example, his use of continuous concrete planters of dwarf yaupon, with crepe myrtle accents at the base of the Signal Towers created a strong horizontal margin that set the complex apart from other buildings (Figure 9).
Further symmetry was provided by the planting of mahonia bushes at each notched corner of Conrad Hall. Added definition was given to the east entrance by a concrete plaza embedded with brick belts, and two square, symmetrically placed bench/planting boxes (Figures 45 and HALS GA-06-02). Daugherty applied greater landscape detail around the Signal Towers complex, while subordinate outlying classrooms received less vegetation and definition.
For the latter, only single trees and bushes were used to accentuate building corners or windows, while junctures between buildings and grade were mostly left bare (Figure Altogether, the concentration of landscape components around the Signal Towers complex and the economy of landscape features in the rest of the campus helped reinforce the classical hierarchy of the building layout. In spite of the loss of some plantings, the subtleties imparted by Daugherty, and the personal scale and pedestrian emphasis of the Signal School, remain the most discernible aspects of his design for the Signal School. PART II. Physical Information A.
Landscape Character and Description Summary: The Signal School landscape reflects a cohesive design that unites the campus through a strong pedestrian circulation system, with trees and plantings to reinforce sight lines and communicate entrances and egress. Spaces among the buildings are open, with expanses of grass and a hardscape of linear concrete with inlaid brick bands. In spite of the loss of vegetation, the campus still reflects most of Edward Daugherty s planting plan and use of modest outdoor furniture and supporting features. His most effective treatment is the continuous margin of greenery (dwarf yaupon) that wraps around the base of the complex.
Although an Aeck rendering for the Signal Towers shows these plantings growing in a naturalistic manner, the bushes have maintained a tightly manicured appearance from the beginning. The New Formalist approach is also reflected at the main east entrance plaza by two symmetrically placed, square planter/benches. Slightly further to the east, a concrete flagpole plaza lends additional formality. FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No. GA-6 (Page 11) Progressing outward to the classroom buildings, flat expanses of grass create a soft counterpoint to the profusion of sidewalks. Native vegetation, and non-native species commonly used in the southeastern United States, are represented throughout the campus, though much has been removed at unknown times.
Some trees remain at irregular intervals along sidewalks and close to building elevations, lacking the more classical placement used around the Signal Towers. Small features and circulation systems are mostly aligned in a grid pattern or placed diagonally to connect building entrances. Daugherty s thoughtful appointments to interior classroom courtyards created places for student retreat and solitude, striking a balance with the more commanding authority of the high rise Conrad Hall at the Signal Towers. Here, brick and concrete benches and planter boxes, and trees are arranged in both symmetrical fashion and Modernist asymmetry. Matured trees now rise above building roof tops and visually anchor the courtyard spaces.
Finally, the absence of cars and parking lots throughout the complex remains a notable imprint of Daugherty s design approach; his recessed parking area at the west side of the Signal Towers remains the major concentration of cars. Daugherty s other provisions for cars have remained along the margins of the Signal School; no additional parking features have not crept into the core of his pedestrian focused design. Because no as built drawings were found to verify whether all of the intended vegetation was included, the integrity of the landscape cannot be fully known. A review of Daugherty s original drawings shows a greater concentration of trees and shrubs was intended throughout the campus.
For example, a dominant cluster of trees was indicated for the western margin of the Signal School, no doubt to visually shelter the campus from neighboring areas. Anecdotal information regarding the removal of trees may explain the more open appearance of the landscape in general.19 Another period of change was the final campus expansion and the addition of Brant Hall in pushing the western boundary further out and requiring some tree removal.
In spite of these changes, the spirit of Daugherty s original design is expressed today by several landscape values: 1) Hierarchical placement of plantings and trees in a New Formalist manner to reinforce the relative importance of the Signal Towers; 2) Pedestrian emphasis of interconnecting pathways and subordination of cars; and 3) Provision of student courtyards for retreat and reflection. Altogether, the landscape reflects both the classical symmetry of New Formalism as well as the more asymmetrical or naturalistic character of Modernism. All of the surviving vegetation and features date to the period of construction, through and reflect Daugherty s original landscape intentions. His work at Fort Gordon appears to be one of 19 Lieutenant Colonel John R.
Grabowski, Fort Gordon, related that he has overseen the removal of a number of trees throughout the campus, interview, December FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No. GA-6 (Page 12) the only efforts undertaken for the U.S. Department of Defense and represents a singular example of this type of commission.20 B. Character Defining Features: 1. Natural Features a. Topography: The landscape is a flat terrain, with no elevation or topographic variation, aside from some elevated planting boxes around the Tower Building. Along the north boundary of the Signal School, dense evergreen forests have remained a natural backdrop since the time of construction. No changes or contouring of the land have occurred since the period of significance, b.
Vegetation (all original from Daugherty s planting plans and design): Existing native vegetation consists of a small number of crabapple trees. Vegetation introduced by Daugherty consists of multiple deciduous and flowering species, as well as occasional evergreens (pine). All of the following plants and trees originally specified on the landscape plans are represented on the campus today, however, significant attrition of vegetation has occurred from lack of maintenance or deliberate removal. No dates or record of these actions was found. c. The plant list is taken from the original Landscape Plans, East 175A-A-157, East 175B-A- East 175C-A-159.
Trees Acer rubrum (red maple), Acer saccharinum (silver maple), Catalpa bignonioides (catalpa), Cornus florida (dogwood), Crataegus phaenopyrum (Washington hawthorn), Gledisia triacanthos inermis (thornless honeylocust), Lagerstroemia indica (crepe myrtle), Malus floribunda (Japanese crabapple), Magnolia grandiflora (southern magnolia), Pinus caribaea (slash pine), Liquidambar styraciflua (sweet gum), Populus canesens (Carolina grey poplar), Populus nigra italica (Lombardy poplar), Quercus laurifolia (laurel oak), Quercus nigra (water oak), Quercus phellos (willow oak).
Shrubs Barberis julianae (Wintergreen barberry), Cotoneaster Conspicua decora (necklace cotoneaster), Clevera japonica (cleyera), Cotoneaster lacteus (parney cotoneaster), Ilex crenata hetzi (hetzi Japanese holly), Ilex cornuta burfordi (Burford holly), 20 The Cultural Landscape Foundation, and, Atlanta History Center Finding Aids, both accessed 20 December FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No. GA-6 (Page 13) Ilex cornuta rotunda (dwarf Chinese holly), Ilex vomitora nana (dwarf yaupon), Pyracantha low dense (dwarf pyracantha), Mahonia bealie (mahonia), Ilex opaca (American holly). Ground Cover and Perennials Hemerocallis (daylily/variation of golden west), Hedera helix (English ivy), Liriope muscari (big blue liriope).
Summary of Integrity: The greatest loss of integrity to the landscape has occurred to the vegetation. While the density of trees and plantings has diminished over the years at undocumented times, much of Daugherty s design is intact, with the following exceptions: - Along the curvilinear north boundary, the original cluster of slash pine, dogwood, and magnolia remains, though in reduced in overall numbers. - Along the west boundary that follows 8th Avenue, from the west parking lot northward, the curvilinear alignment of trees is less dense, with 40% loss of silver maple, tulip poplar, water oak, willow oak, and magnolia. - Crabapple and Japanese holly remain at building entrances. Crepe myrtle remains at building corners, though in reduced numbers.
- Crabapple and Lombardy poplar tree alignments have been removed from the south side of the campus, along Chamberlain Avenue. - Within the open field, east of the flagpole plaza, most of the willow oak, water oak, and red maple trees have been removed. - Original plantings immediately around the Signal Towers consist of dwarf yaupon and crepe myrtle; most original trees within and bordering the west parking area survive. d. Water: N/A 2. Designed Features: a. Land patterns: The Signal School is located along a major Post arterial (Chamberlain Avenue), and framed by this road on the south side, and by separate Post infrastructure to the east and west. Buildings and landscape continue north to dense evergreen forests. The FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No.
GA-6 (Page 14) land use pattern in this area is grid-like, with low profile buildings of square or rectangular plan, and occasional parking lots. Since additional construction has crept northward toward the Signal School, but has mostly retained low in profile. Buildings dominate the subject landscape and are positioned in parallel or perpendicular relationships to the Signal Towers. These patterns have remained consistent since original construction. b. Circulation: Major automobile access is along the Signal School margins via the main southern road, Chamberlain Avenue, and along 8th Avenue, which curves around the north side of the property.
Within the campus proper, circulation patterns are original to Daugherty s design and placed in symmetrical fashion centrally, alongside, and diagonally among classroom buildings. Sidewalks create both functional and visual links between classroom buildings and the Signal Towers complex. Within the classroom courtyards, trees and small vegetation create an open yet intimate setting. Following Daugherty s original design, automobile circulation is confined to the margins of the campus, with four major parking areas allocated at the west side of the tower building; a rectangular parking area further west; a square parking area at the far east boundary; and a long parking lot on the north side.
Aside from the maturing of courtyard trees, no alterations are evident in the circulation patterns Daugherty laid out. c. Views and vistas: The following description reflects the original landscape plan as it appears today. In conformance with the New Formalist hierarchy of design, greenery and plantings are more extensive around the Signal Towers complex, but become less frequent in outlying areas around classroom buildings. The continuous band of dwarf yaupon planted at the base of the Signal Towers defines the higher importance of this building group. Views and spatial relationships are mostly unimpeded by vegetation; the flat nature of the terrain limits views to the immediate campus.
The minimalist character of the landscape affords open sight lines among buildings, partly a result of vegetation removal. Building egress is clearly readable, with individual trees and shrubs defining building entrances. Concrete walkways dominate and visually link buildings and access points. Parking lots are framed by both deciduous and evergreen trees, shielding these areas somewhat from the central core of the campus. Within the classroom courtyards, circulation is confined, with trees and small vegetation that create an open yet intimate setting. As courtyard trees have matured, their tops have become visible. d. Water: No water or water features are present. e.
Buildings and structures: The Signal School consists of large two-story classroom buildings of rectangular plan, dominated by the administrative Signal Towers complex, and Conrad FORT GORDON SIGNAL SCHOOL HALS No. GA-6 (Page 15) Hall that rises multiple stories and creates a commanding presence on the landscape. The only landscape feature added (ca. to Daugherty s design is the flagpole plaza to the east of the Signal Towers, a rectangular concrete and brick inlaid pad with individual flag standards aligned north to south. This structure has not been altered. f. Small scale elements: All original elements from Daugherty s design are intact and include the following: Signal Towers The majority of small features and outdoor furniture is concentrated around this building complex.
The east side plaza (main entrance) consists of the original concrete and brick inlaid surface, and includes two square concrete planters with integrated benches. These are symmetrically placed and located within the outer plaza. Surrounding the complex are simple continuous concrete planters containing tightly manicured dwarf yaupon. The flagpole plaza, further east, is a symmetrical and arching set of poles with a prominent center pole, set in a surface of concrete and brick bands. Classroom Courtyards: Some courtyard furnishings include square concrete planters with integrated benches, symmetrically placed in quadrants. Other courtyards have either symmetrical L-shaped or semi-circular/non-symmetrical brick benches. g. Archaeological sites: N/A h. Other: N/A PART III.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION A. Drawings, plans: Drawings are in the public domain, on file at the Directorate of Public Works, Fort Gordon, Georgia. B. Historic views, photographs: None were located. C. Interviews: None. D.
Block