APPLICATION FOR INCLUSION OF A PROPERTY IN THE U.S. WORLD HERITAGE TENTATIVE LIST

PURPOSE OF THIS APPLICATION

The National Park Service Office of International Affairs is working together with the George Wright Society to draft the new U.S. World Heritage Tentative List (Tentative List) of sites that will serve as the inventory of properties in the United States which the U.S. considers suitable for inscription on the World Heritage List. The Tentative List is being prepared with the involvement of property owners and other stakeholders, including the public, to guide U.S. nomination of future sites for inscription on the World Heritage List.

This Application is available to be filled out on a strictly voluntary basis by or for property owners of nationally important sites. Information provided by all the submitted applications will form the foundation for Department of the Interior decisions on which sites to include in the new Tentative List. Property owners who wish their properties to be considered for addition to the U.S. Tentative List must submit their completed applications on or before April 1, 2007.

GENERAL INFORMATION

Background:

The World Heritage Convention was initiated in 1973 to organize international cooperation for the recognition and protection of the world’s natural and cultural heritage, first and foremost for sites inscribed in the World Heritage List established by the Convention, but also for all the heritage of humanity. The World Heritage Convention today has 182 signatory countries.

World Heritage Sites are internationally recognized through UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) as the most outstanding examples of the world’s cultural and natural heritage. Currently, there are 830 World Heritage Sites in 138 countries. There are 20 World Heritage Sites in the United States, of which 8 are designated for culture and 12 for nature. The U.S. is among the top 10 of countries in terms of the number of sites on the World Heritage List.

A Tentative List is a national list of natural and cultural properties that a country believes appear to meet the eligibility criteria for nomination to the World Heritage List. It is an annotated list of candidate sites which a country intends to nominate within a given time period. (A section of the World Heritage Centre’s website, which is accessible at http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelist, provides information on the Tentative List process and access to the current lists of other countries.)

The U.S. is now updating its Tentative List to serve as a guide for at least the next decade (2009-2019) of U.S. nominations to the World Heritage List. The Tentative List will be structured so as to meet the World Heritage Committee’s December 2004 request that any one nation nominate no more than two sites per year, at least one of which must be a natural nomination. The number of individual sites planned to be included in the new U.S. Tentative List may be somewhat larger than 20 to permit discretion in selecting nominations and because some sites may become grouped together as a single nomination, e.g., to represent jointly an important historical theme or shared ecological relationship.

Introduction:

The National Park Service Office of International Affairs, working on behalf of the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks of the Department of the Interior and together with the George Wright Society, is soliciting recommendations of sites to be considered for the inventory of properties which the U.S. considers suitable for inscription on the World Heritage List. This document provides both a general explanation of the project to prepare the new Tentative List and an Application, which is designed to solicit public participation in the process to develop the new list. Additional information appears in the document “U.S. World Heritage Tentative List: Questions and Answers.” Directions to sources of detailed advice are also provided there. (http://www.nps.gov/oia/topics/worldheritage/faqtentativelist.htm).

To have a property be considered for possible inclusion on the Tentative List, the property owner or the owner’s authorized representative must complete the attached Application and submit it no later than April 1, 2007. The National Park Service will use the submitted information to help determine whether a property meets the legal prerequisites for World Heritage nomination and otherwise appears to be a strong candidate for nomination during the next decade. If a property is selected for possible inclusion in the Tentative List, the owner may be asked to provide additional information on a case-by-case basis. The Department of the Interior will make the final determination of which sites to include in the U.S. Tentative List.

This Application is available on request. It is also being distributed to all who have previously requested it. In addition, it is available on the Office of International Affairs website at http://www.nps.gov/oia/worldheritage.application.htm and on the George Wright Society webpage at http://www.georgewright.org. The Tentative List prepared through this process will be submitted by the Secretary of the Interior through the Secretary of State to the World Heritage Centre of UNESCO by February 1, 2008. The United States will become eligible to begin the process of nominating any of the sites contained in the new Tentative List for inscription to the World Heritage List starting in February 2009. The new Tentative List will supersede a similar list of sites, previously referred to as the Indicative Inventory that was completed in 1982.

Legal Property Rights:

Inclusion of a property in the U.S. Tentative List or the World Heritage List does not in any way affect the legal status of, or an owner’s rights in, a property. Final inclusion of a property in the World Heritage List includes recognition that the property remains subject to all U.S. laws applicable to the property.

APPLICATION PROCESS U.S. law and program regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations 73) require that all property owners must concur in any World Heritage nomination and in any proposal that their property be included in the U.S. Tentative List. Thus, to be eligible for proposing a property for the new Tentative List, an application must include the signatures of all the owners or their representatives.

In the event that owners of properties that are included in the Tentative List change their minds as to whether they wish their properties to be considered, their properties will be withdrawn from the Tentative List and corresponding adjustments will be made in the composition of the Tentative List.

First Step: Completion of Questionnaires:

Only owners or those authorized by owners may apply. Applicants must use the accompanying Application, which may be submitted electronically by e-mail, on paper by mail or fax, or by mailing a compact disc containing a MS Word file.

Only a single copy is required. Please provide the necessary information if you would like receipt of the Application to be acknowledged.

E-mail submissions should be sent to:

jcharleton@contractor.nps.gov

Mailed submissions should be sent to:

U.S. World Heritage Tentative List ProjectOffice of International Affairs (0050)1201 Eye Street, NW, Suite 550A U.S. National Park ServiceWashington, DC 20240

Faxed submissions should be addressed to U.S. World Heritage Tentative List Project and faxed to:

Fax: 202-371-1446

To receive full consideration, completed Applications must be returned on or before April 1, 2007.

Second Step: National Park Service Evaluation of Applications and Consultation with Owners

Only properties whose owners submit, or authorize to have submitted on their behalf, complete Applications will receive full evaluation for possible final inclusion in the Tentative List.

The National Park Service Office of International Affairs will notify owners of properties that appear, based on professional staff evaluation of the initial Application, to be the most likely candidates for inclusion in the Tentative List. Depending on the number of responses received and an assessment of other factors, including the completeness and accuracy of the information submitted, those owners may be asked to correct or amend their original Applications. Joint revision of Applications may be recommended in some cases, if it is being suggested that some properties be grouped for inclusion together. Owners of properties which are selected for the second step of the process should be notified by May 1, 2007, with an estimated deadline for their further responses of June 15, 2007.

Owners whose properties are not recommended for further consideration for inclusion in the Tentative List will also be notified of the results and provided with a statement of the reasons their properties were not included. Owners who disagree with an initial recommendation by the National Park Service that their properties not be selected for inclusion in the Tentative List may submit a written response, which will be provided to the next level of reviewers of the draft Tentative List for their consideration.

Third Step: Developing the Tentative List:

The National Park Service recommendations will receive additional reviews, including comments by interested organizations and members of the public. After these reviews, the Secretary of the Interior, through the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks and in accordance with the World Heritage program regulations, will approve and finalize the official U.S. Tentative List and forward it to the U.S. Department of State for submittal to the World Heritage Committee by February 1, 2008. An accompanying

report will explain in detail the process and reasoning by which the sites included in the final Tentative List were selected.

Evaluation Criteria:

The criteria that will be used in evaluating and selecting sites for inclusion in the Tentative List will include the World Heritage criteria, obtaining a good balance among types of sites, and technical judgment, based on past experience, of which sites are most likely to be favorably received by the World Heritage Committee and its Advisory Bodies.

Some criteria for selecting sites will involve the scholarly process of identifying “gaps” and reviewing and conducting comparative studies of related types of sites. Comparative studies conducted by the World Heritage Committee’s Advisory Bodies on the listing of sites--IUCN (the World Conservation Union) and ICOMOS (the International Council on Monuments and Sites) will be carefully consulted. Because these studies leave unaddressed many types of sites, such as marine sites and multi-national nominations, it will be difficult in the short term to achieve a well balanced list for closing “gaps” in the U.S. list, especially given the small number of sites that will be nominated during the next decade. Another factor in the selection process is that it is not possible to predict in advance how many owners will complete Applications requesting that individual properties be considered for the new Tentative List and how quickly nominations for those properties that are selected can be finalized and submitted. The number of Applications that are returned will affect the task of grouping sites and developing a long-term schedule for their consideration.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE U.S. TENTATIVE LIST

Once the new Tentative List has been established, it may not be feasible or practical to develop a schedule of the sequence for nominations that might be offered in particular years. There are a number of considerations that will impact that process including changes over time in Administrations and the need to consider owners who have already requested inclusion—in some cases a number of years ago--and who have already expended substantial efforts toward nominating their sites.

HOW TO COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION

Before completing the body of the Application, please review the next few pages that deal with “Prerequisites” to determine if you should proceed.

This Application, designed to obtain key information about properties being proposed for inclusion in the U.S. World Heritage Tentative List, is a simplified version of the

World Heritage nomination form (Format) (http://whc.unesco.org/en/nomination) used to nominate properties to the World Heritage List. A few questions have been added at the beginning to make it appropriate for use in the United States.

Please use this Application as a template. If you prepare it on a computer, you should be able to open up space between the questions so that you can avoid the use of continuation sheets. You should also feel free to adapt the language of the questions and your responses to fit the circumstances of the site or sites that you are proposing (as, for example, plural rather than singular forms).

Please try to complete the Application as fully as possible. If you do not know or are not sure about how to respond to a certain question, please indicate that you do not know the answer by noting that it is “unknown” or “uncertain,” rather than not responding at all.

For this Application, it is not necessary for you to include documentation in the form of full footnotes and bibliography, but please do give the source of any key quotations upon which you are justifying the property’s importance in the Justification (Section 3).

For Additional Information and Assistance:

A written Guide to the U.S. World Heritage Program, which includes detailed instructions on how to complete World Heritage nominations and which follows the numbering scheme of the Format, is available to help with resolving questions that arise in filling out this Application. The Guide is available upon request or can be downloaded at. http://www.nps.gov/oia/worldheritage.application.htm Applicants may also find it useful to consult the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (http://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide05-en.pdf), the main written working tool on World Heritage issues at the international level.

Technical assistance and additional information about how to complete this Application will be available from:

James H. CharletonWorld Heritage AdvisorOffice of International AffairsNational Park Service, 1201 Eye Street NW (0050)Washington, DC 20005. E-mail: james_ charleton@contractor.nps.gov. Fax 202-371-1446.

Phone inquiries may also be placed to him at 202-354-1802 or to April Brooks at 202-354-1808.

In completing the Application, it will be useful for you to consult not only with the NPS Office of International Affairs, but also to seek advice from the U.S. International Council on Monuments and Sites (US/ICOMOS) and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature of the U.S. (IUCN USA), depending on the nature of the sites being proposed. Contacts for them are: USICOMOS IUCN USA & Caribbean Multilateral Office401 F Street, NW, Suite 331 1630 Connecticut Ave. NW, 3rd floorWashington, DC 20001 Washington, DC 20009 202-842-1866 202-387-4826

Learned societies, museums, professional organizations, etc., may also be asked to assist.

OMB Control #: 1024-0250

Exp. Date: 08/31/2009

APPLICATION FOR INCLUSION OF A PROPERTY IN THE U.S. WORLD HERITAGE TENTATIVE LIST

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT STATEMENT:

16 U.S.C. 470 a-1 authorizes collection of this information. This information will be used to help the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks prepare a “Tentative List” of candidate sites for possible nomination to the UNESCO World Heritage List. Response to this request is voluntary. No action may be taken against you for refusing to supply the information requested. A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

ESTIMATED BURDEN STATEMENT:

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 64 hours per response (ranging from 40 to 120 hours, depending on the complexity of the site), including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining data, and completing and reviewing the form. Direct comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this form to the Office of International Affairs, National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20240.

Dayton Aviation Sites

Prerequisites for U.S. World Heritage Nominations

Prerequisite 1 - Legal Requirements:

A. National Significance:

Has the property been formally determined to be nationally significant for its cultural values, natural values, or both (in other words, has it been formally designated as a National Historic Landmark, a National Natural Landmark, or as a Federal reserve of national importance, such as a National Park, National Monument, or National Wildlife Refuge)? If not, are there on-going processes to achieve any of the above designations and what is their status? (Listing in the National Register of Historic Places is not equivalent to National Historic Landmark status.)

YES: ___X______ NO: ________

Comment:Huffman Prairie Flying Field – NHL 21 June 1990; Dayton Aviation Heritage National

Historical Park 16 October 1992Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing Shop – NHL 21 June 1990;

Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park 16 October 1992Wright Flyer III – NHL 21 June 1990; within Wright Hall, Dayton Aviation Heritage

National Historical Park 16 October 1992Hawthorn Hill (Orville Wright Mansion) – NHL 17 June 1991 _________________________________________________________

B. Owner Concurrence:

Are all the property owners aware of this proposal for the inclusion of the property in the U.S. Tentative List and do all of the property owners agree that it should be considered? If any agreement is uncertain or tentative, or if the ownership situation is disputed, otherwise complicated, or unclear, please explain the issues briefly.

YES: ___X______ NO: ________

Comment: See attached letters of concurrence ____________________________________________________________

C. Willingness to Discuss Protective Measures:

If the property is nominated to the World Heritage List, it will be necessary for all of the property owners to work with the Department of the Interior to document fully existing measures to protect the property and possibly to devise such additional measures as may

be necessary to protect the property in perpetuity. Are all the property owners willing to enter into such discussions?

YES: ___X______ NO: ________

Comment: ___________________________________________________________

D. Scheduling:

If you wish a property to be nominated to the World Heritage List in a particular year during the period 2009-2019, please indicate the reason(s) why and the earliest year in which you feel it will be possible to meet all requirements for nomination. (Please review this entire Questionnaire before finally answering this question.)

Preferred Year: No preferred year

Reasons: _____________________________________________________________

Prerequisite 2 - Specific Requirements for Nomination of Certain Types of Properties:

E. Serial (multi-component) Properties:

If you are proposing a nomination that includes separate components that could be submitted separately over several years, do you believe that the first property proposed would qualify to be placed on the World Heritage List in its own right?

Explanation: There will be a very limited number of sites nominated over the next decade. Owners of similar properties likely will be encouraged to work together to present joint proposals for serial nominations. An example would be a proposal to nominate several properties designed by the same architect. It is critical to note that the first property presented in a serial nomination must qualify for listing in its own right.

YES: __X_______ NO: ________

Comment: While the Huffman Prairie Flying Field, the lead unit of this nomination, qualifies for placement on the World Heritage List in its own right, separate nominations for the individual properties identified in this document are not foreseen. ______________________________________________________________

F. Serial (multi-component) Properties:

Are you proposing this property as an extension of or a new component to an existing World Heritage Site?

YES: _______ NO X______

Name of Existing Site: _______________________________________________________

Prerequisite 3 - Other Requirements:

G. Support of Stakeholders

In addition to owners, please list other stakeholders and interested parties who support the property’s proposed inclusion in the Tentative List. Also note any known to be opposed.

Explanation: The purpose of the Tentative List is to propose candidate properties that are likely to be successfully nominated during the next decade. It is clear that a consensus among stakeholders will be helpful in nominating a site and later in securing its proper protection. Thus, only properties that enjoy strong, preferably unanimous, support from stakeholders will be recommended for inclusion in the U.S. Tentative List.

In addition to owners, stakeholders primarily include:

--Governors, Members of Congress and State legislators who represent the area where the property is located,--the highest local elected official, or official body, unless there is none,--Native Americans, American Indian tribes, or other groups and individuals who possess legally recognized claims or privileges in the area or at the site being proposed (e.g., life tenancy or hunting and fishing rights),--organizations established to advocate for protection and appropriate use of the property proposed for nomination.

If definitive information is not available at the time you filled out this Questionnaire, please so indicate.

Supporters: The Wright Family Foundation; the United States Air Force; Dayton History; the local Congressional delegation (Senator Brown; Representatives Turner and Hobson); Ohio Governor Ted Strickland; Dayton Mayor Rhine McLin; the National Trust for Historic Preservation; Preservation Dayton; the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum; the Aviation Heritage Foundation (and the National Aviation Heritage Area); the Ohio Historical Society; and Aviation Trail, Inc.

Opponents: This application faces no known community opposition

Comment: Please see enclosed letters of support and refer to the letter submitted by Senator Brown directly to the NPS Office of International Affairs.

Information Requested about Applicant Properties

(The numbers of the sections and subsections below are in the same order as and correspond to sections of the World Heritage Committee’s official Format used for the nomination of World Heritage Sites. This is to allow easy reference to and comparison of the material.)

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY OR PROPERTIES

1.a. Country:

If it is intended that the suggested nomination will include any properties in countries other than the United States, please note the countries here.

Explanation: Please note that the United States can nominate only property under U.S. jurisdiction. You are not expected to contact other governments and owners abroad, although you may do so if you wish. Each national government must nominate its own sites, although the United States will consider forwarding your suggestion to another government for that government to consider as a joint nomination with the United States.

Names of countries: United States of America

1.b. State, Province or Region:

In what State(s) and/or Territories is the property located? Also note the locality and give a street address if one is available.

Huffman Prairie Flying Field: Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Greene County, Ohio 45433 (part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park)

Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing: 22 South Williams Street, Dayton, Montgomery County, Ohio 45402 (part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park)

Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall: Dayton History at Carillon Park, 1000 Carillon Boulevard, Dayton, Montgomery County, Ohio 45409 (part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park)

Hawthorn Hill: 901 Harman Avenue, Oakwood, Montgomery County, Ohio 45419______________________________________________________________________

1.c. Names of Property:

What is the preferred or proposed name of the property or properties proposed for nomination? If the site has multiple names, explain why you chose the primary choice or choices. (The name should not exceed 200 characters, including spaces and punctuation.)

Dayton Aviation Sites

Popular and Historic names

What are any popular or historic names by which the property is also known?

Huffman Prairie Flying Field (part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park)

Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing (part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park)

1905 Wright Flyer III; John W. Berry, Sr. Wright Brothers Aviation Center (part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park)

Hawthorn Hill (Wright Mansion).

Naming of serial (multiple component) properties and transboundary sites.

Try to choose brief descriptive names. In the case of serial nominations, give an overall name to the group (e.g., Baroque Churches of the Philippines). (Give the names of the individual components in a table that you insert under 1f.)

Group or Transboundary Name: Dayton Aviation Sites ____________________________________________

Other names or site numbers

Explanation: If a site has multiple names, explain why you chose the primary choice or choices. If the site has no common name or is known only by a number or set of numbers, please explain. _______________________________________________________________________

1.d.-e. Location, boundaries, and key features of the nominated property

Include with this Application sketch maps or other small maps, preferably letter-size, that show:

- the location of the property- the boundaries of any zones of special legal protection - the position of major natural features and/or individual buildings and structures- any open spaces (squares, plazas) and other major spatial relationships (the space between buildings may at times be more important than the buildings)

Please provide here a list of the maps that you have included.

1. Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park Boundary Map, June 2002 (referencing plot 101-01 for Huffman Prairie Flying Field, 101-05 for

Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, and 101-02 for Wright Hall, which houses the Wright Flyer III)

2. Map of Hawthorn Hill, Montgomery County, Ohio, Recorder’s Office

3. Map of the West Third Street National Register District (with the location of Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing emboldened)

4. Map of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, showing the relative locations of Huffman Prairie Flying Field and Carillon Historical Park (the location of Wright Hall and the Wright Flyer III within Wright Brothers Aviation Center)

5. Detail map of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park (taken from part of Map 4), showing the location of Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing (as the “Wright Cycle Company”)

6. Map of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base

1.f. Area of nominated property (ha.)

Explanation: State the approximate area proposed in hectares (1 hectare=2.471 acres). Give corresponding acre equivalents in parentheses. Insert just below this question a table for serial nominations that shows the names and addresses of the component parts, regions (if different for different components), and areas.

Total Nominated Area: 35.51 ha (87.91 acres)

Site Name Address Area1. Huffman Prairie Flying Field

Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433

34.1 ha (84.4 acres)

2. Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing

22 South Williams Street, Dayton, Ohio, 45402

0.06 ha (0.16 acres)

3. Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall

Dayton History at Carillon Park, 1000 Carillon Boulevard, Dayton, Ohio 45409

0.14 ha (0.35 acres)

4. Hawthorn Hill 901 Harman Avenue, Oakwood, Ohio 45419 1.21 ha (3 acres)

2. DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY

2.a. Description of the Property (select the one following category that best fits the property)

Cultural property

Briefly describe the property and list its major components. A summary in a few paragraphs or pages should be all that is required.

Explanation: This section can describe significant buildings, their architectural style, date of construction, materials, etc. It can also describe the setting such as gardens, parks, associated vistas. Other tangible geographic, cultural, historic, archeological, artistic, architectural, and/or associative values may also merit inclusion.

1. Huffman Prairie Flying Field is the site where Orville (1871-1948) and Wilbur Wright (1867-1912) conducted research and experimentation that led to the 1905 development of the world’s first practical airplane, the Wright Flyer III. At the time of the Wrights’ work, it was a cow pasture covered with prairie vegetation owned by Dayton banker Torrence Huffman. The 34 ha (84 acre) site, now preserved as part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, is approximately 13 km (8 mi) from the site of the Wrights’ home in west Dayton. An open landscape with a few mature trees, the Huffman Prairie Flying Field contains a reproduction of the Wrights’ 1905 hangar built near the location of the original hangar and a reproduction of the Simms Station interurban railway platform used by the Wrights in their travels between their home and Huffman Prairie. The footprint of the site of the larger hangar built by the Wrights in 1910 is marked with limestone blocks; archaeologists have not determined the site of the hangar built and used by the Wrights in 1904. The site of the Wrights’ experiments is now maintained as informal pasture through periodic mowing, with flagpoles marking the corners of its Wright-era boundaries. It borders the 44.1 ha (109-acre) Huffman Prairie, one of the largest remaining tallgrass prairies in Ohio and an Ohio Natural Landmark. The Secretary of the Interior designated the Huffman Prairie Flying Field a National Historic Landmark in 1990, and it became part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park in 1992; the NPS’s American Aviation Heritage National Historic Landmark theme study (2006) also identifies and contextualizes the site. The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics named the Flying Field a Historic Aerospace Site in 2003.

2. Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing (22 South Williams Street): The building rented by Orville and Wilbur Wright from 1895 to 1897 for their bicycle sales and repair business (housed on its first floor) and their job printing shop (on its second floor) is a two-storey detached rectangular commercial brick edifice with a full basement and a single-storey rear frame addition with 235.4 m² (2,534 ft²) of usable space. Located less than 200 m (650 ft) from the site of the Wright home at 7 Hawthorne Street (the family’s residence from 1871 to 1878 and 1884 to 1914), this 1886 building built by Abraham and Joseph Nicholas served as a grocery store, feed store, saloon, and boarding house before its rental by the Wrights. Its principal first-floor façade, fronting South Williams Street to the west, contains large display windows capped with a limestone lintel supported by four one-piece limestone columns with stylized capitals. A double door on the north face of the building likely provided a freight entrance to building occupants, while a double door with a transom window situated directly above

the first-floor double door likely provided freight access to the second floor. Aside from the storefront display windows, the building has two-over-two double-hung sash windows with darkly-painted shutters and limestone lintels and sills. At some point between the end of the Wrights’ lease in 1897 and 1911, the building’s owners converted it into a two-family residence. Between 1985 and 1988 Aviation Trail, Inc., a Dayton aviation history nonprofit organization, rehabilitated the structure to its approximate 1895-1897 appearance. The Secretary of the Interior designated the building a National Historic Landmark in 1990, and it became part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park in 1992. The NPS’s American Aviation Heritage National Historic Landmark theme study (2006) also identifies and contextualizes the site.

3. Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall: Designated a National Historic Landmark by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior in 1990, this muslin and ash/spruce airplane, built and modified throughout 1905, is the final of three experimental airplanes designed and built by the Wright brothers as they worked to create a practical airplane (the others being their 1903 and 1904 airplanes). Weighing 322 kg (710 lbs) and standing 2.87 m (9.4 ft) tall and 8.5 m (28 ft) long, the airplane has a wing area of 46.7 m² (503 ft²) and a horizontal front rudder area of 7.71 m² (83 m²). Its power came from a 14.914 kW (20 hp) engine connected to twin pusher propellers. The airplane’s pilot lay prone on the lower wing to the left of the engine with hips in a cradle harness laterally connected to a system of wires that operated a helical twist in both wings. The pilot operated the plane’s rudder with his left hand, while using his right hand to operate an upright lever that controlled the plane’s elevators. Restored from 1947 to 1950, initially under the supervision of Orville Wright, the plane retains approximately 85 percent of its 1905 material. The Flyer (and Wright Hall, the National Register-eligible building in which it is exhibited) became part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park in 1992; the NPS’s American Aviation Heritage National Historic Landmark theme study (2006) also identifies and contextualizes the airplane. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers named it a Historic Mechanical Engineering Landmark in 2003.

4. Hawthorn Hill: Designated a National Historic Landmark by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior in 1991 (and identified and contextualized in the NPS’s American Aviation Heritage National Historic Landmark theme study [2006]), this two-and-one-half-storey brick building completed in 1914 was home to Orville Wright from 1914 until 1948, and to his father, Milton Wright (1828-1917), and sister, Katharine Wright Haskell (1874-1929), for shorter periods of time. With a design envisioned by Orville and, before his 1912 death, Wilbur Wright, and refined by the Dayton architectural firm of Schenck and Williams, the biaxially symmetrical Georgian Revival structure contains 15 rooms and 580 m² (6,242 ft²) of living space. Its concrete foundation supports walls of white-faced brick. Four wooden Ionic columns extend two storeys on the north and south faces of the mansion, each supporting a pediment containing a fanlight. Classically-detailed pilasters serve as a transition between the porticos and the rectangular mass of the central building. The large first-floor entry doors are flanked by glass sidelights. On the second floor, Palladian windows extend behind ornamental balconies and are flanked by oval bull’s eye windows with a frame of voussoirs and a radiating glazing bar system resembling the fanlights.

The house has a low-pitch hipped roof truncated at the top with a wooden balustrade. The 1.5 m (4.9 ft) entablature features modillions resembling a dentil band to visually support the cornice. The side porches are topped with balustrades that match the roof balusters and the balusters under the porch rail. Simpler Tuscan columns and a scaled-down version of the main eave entablature unite the porches with the core building by retaining graceful proportions. Prominent chimneys extend through the roof on the east and west sides, with bathroom windows opening through them. Plane-gabled roof dormers feature cornice returns and arched tracery windows. The prominent window style is a six-over-one double-hung window used throughout the structure and grouped in such a way on the first floor to produce triple windows. The keystone lintels feature brick voussoirs with limestone keystones from Bedford, Indiana. Window sills and all outside steps are also limestone.

The main stair hall dominates the interior as its central organizing feature. Downstairs, the hall divides dining spaces from leisure spaces. Upstairs, seven bedrooms are placed symmetrically around four bathrooms. The northwest corner of both principal floors is reserved for a housekeeper’s suite, while the attic space is high and open. _______________________________________________________________________

Which features or aspects of the property do you believe qualify it for the World Heritage List?

1. Huffman Prairie Flying Field: This site’s status as the location of research, development, and testing that led to the creation of the first practical airplane (the Wright Flyer III) and as the place where humans learned to fly qualifies it for the World Heritage List. While Wilbur and Orville Wright attained the first free, controlled, and sustained flights in a power-driven heavier-than-air machine at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, in December of 1903, their tests at the Huffman Prairie Flying Field in 1904 and 1905 transformed a barely-controllable airplane that flew for less than a minute into the first practical, controllable aircraft in the world. Research and development at Huffman Prairie Flying Field using the scientific method led to their construction of an airplane that could take off, fly until it exhausted its fuel supply, land safely, and do so repeatedly. It was at Huffman Prairie Flying Field that the Wrights’ research led to their separating airplane rudder control from wing-warping, allowing the pilot to control their aircraft in three dimensions of flight and enhancing airplane stability by enlarging the craft’s elevator. The site’s qualifications for the World Heritage List are enhanced by the integrity of its cultural landscape, which retains its original location and high degrees of setting, feeling, and association, and also retains significant degrees of design and materials. 2. Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing: The small brick building at 22 South Williams Street in Dayton is the location where Orville and Wilbur Wright initiated their research process into the possibility of heavier-than-air powered flight. It provided an environment in which they started to apply their understanding of the physics and mechanics of bicycles to the physics and mechanics of aviation and where, through their printing and bicycle businesses, they created the working relationship through which they later produced their gliders and invented the airplane. Their Wright Cycle Company

(on the first floor of 22 South Williams Street) and Wright and Wright Printing (on the building’s second floor) also provided them sufficient income to support the experiments that led to their later tests at the Huffman Prairie Flying Field and their invention of the practical airplane.

3. Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall: As the world’s first practical airplane, the Wright Flyer III qualifies for the World Heritage List as the culminating product and physical representation of the 1899-1905 research, development and experimentation conducted by Wilbur and Orville Wright. It was the first airplane in the world capable of sustained, controlled flight and suitable for practical use since it took off and landed in a controlled, safe manner. It was the first airplane able to bank, turn, circle, and make figure-eight patterns in the sky and the first airplane capable of performing the uses envisioned by the Wrights for airplanes: military scouting, transportation of mail to isolated locations, exploration, and sport. Orville Wright participated in designing Wright Hall, which opened to the public in 1950, as a purpose-built exhibit facility for the Wright Flyer at Dayton’s Carillon Park.

4. Hawthorn Hill: Orville Wright’s mansion in Oakwood, Ohio, represents the international status achieved by the Wrights after their development of the practical airplane and their demonstration of it in Europe in 1908 and 1909 and subsequent sales and licensing agreements with governments and individuals. Though the extremely introverted Orville considered Hawthorn Hill a personal defense against the intrusions of the outside world, the property symbolizes the economic success the Wrights achieved from the international marketing of their work in aviation research and development.

What are the important present or proposed uses of the property and how do they compare with the traditional or historic uses of it?

1. Huffman Prairie Flying Field is a component of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park and is open for public visitation on scheduled hours. The United States Air Force, working with the National Park Service, maintains the site as a historic property, closely resembling its 1905 landscape, though the field is no longer used for pasturage and aviators do not modify and test airplanes there. The site maintains its traditional character as an open field. No changes in its future operations are foreseen.

2. Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing: A rental commercial property upon its construction in 1886, this building became a residential duplex at some point after 1911. Now owned and operated by the National Park Service as part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, the 22 South Williams Street property contains exhibits examining the Wrights’ bicycle business and relationships between bicycles and early Wright airplanes, and a representational reconstruction of what the Wrights’ bicycle sales area and workshop (no written descriptions or photographs of the respective areas exist) during the 1895 to 1897 period. The building’s second floor – the site of Wright and Wright Printing – is used for National Park Service offices. The first floor is open to visitors on scheduled hours. No changes in the site’s future operations are foreseen.

3. Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall: Dayton History’s Carillon Park exhibits the 1905 airplane on scheduled hours in Wright Hall, a commemorative building built between 1948 and 1950 with design assistance from Orville Wright specifically to exhibit the 1905 airplane (and only the 1905 airplane). Wright Hall is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and a component of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park. Today, the airplane is a static museum piece, retaining the vast majority of its 1905 structure, and no longer flies. Since 1950, the airplane’s location and its public exhibition have not changed, and no changes in its exhibition location or schedule are foreseen.

4. Hawthorn Hill: The Wrights built Hawthorn Hill as a residence; between 1914 and 1948 it served as Orville Wright’s primary residence (and, for shorter periods, as the primary residence of his father and sister). From 1948 to 2006, the private, Dayton-based National Cash Register company used Hawthorn Hill as a guest house for corporate visitors. NCR retained many Wright furnishings after its acquisition of the property, and the physical layout and landscape of the property changed minimally between Orville’s 1948 death and NCR’s 2006 donation of Hawthorn Hill to the Wright Family Foundation. In cooperation with Dayton History, the National Park Service, and the city of Oakwood, the Wright Family Foundation anticipates opening Hawthorn Hill to public visitation as a historic house property during the summer of 2007. The Wright Family Foundation hopes to add Hawthorn Hill to Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park.

Cultural landscapes (combined works of nature and humans)

Briefly describe the property and list its major components. A summary in a few paragraphs or pages is all that is required.________________________________________________________________

Which features or aspects of the property do you believe qualify it for the World Heritage List?________________________________________________________________________

What are the important present or proposed uses of the property and how do they compare with the traditional or historic uses of it?

Consider how both natural and cultural processes have contributed to creating the culturalLandscape and give special attention to the interaction of humans and nature. All major aspects of the history of human activity in the area need to be considered.________________________________________________________________________

Natural property

Briefly describe the property and list its major components. A summary in a few paragraphs or pages is all that is required.

Explanation: This section can describe the property’s important physical features and scientific values, including geography, geology, topography, habitats, species and population sizes (including an indication of any that are threatened), and other significant ecological features and processes.

_______________________________________________________________________

Which features or aspects of the property do you believe qualify it for the World Heritage List?_______________________________________________________________________

What are the important present or proposed uses of the property and how do they compare with the traditional or historic uses of it (e.g., to what extent and by what methods are natural resources being exploited)?________________________________________________________________________

Mixed property (one that meets at least one natural criterion and one cultural criterion—see Section 3a just below for criteria)

Briefly describe the property and list its major components. A summary in a few paragraphs or pages is all that is required.___________________________________________________________________

Which features or aspects of the property do you believe qualify it for the World Heritage List?

What are the important present or proposed uses of the property and how do they compare with the traditional or historic uses of it?

2.b. History and Development of the Property (select the one following category that best fits the property)

Cultural property

When was the site built or first occupied and how did it arrive at its present form and condition? If it has undergone significant changes in use or physical alterations, include an explanation.

Explanation: If the property was built in stages or if there have been major changes, demolitions, abandonment and reoccupation, or rebuilding since completion, briefly summarize these events. For archeological sites, the names of archeologists and dates of their work should also be noted, especially if the site is regarded as important in the history of archeology as well as for its intrinsic merits.

1. Huffman Prairie Flying Field:

Not eager to continue their expensive and time-consuming treks to the Atlantic coast of North Carolina for their experimental flights, in 1904 the Wright brothers searched the Dayton area for an appropriate test field and identified Huffman Prairie as a promising location. They arranged their use of it with its owner, Dayton banker Torrence Huffman. The Wrights adapted the existing pasture, adding a small frame hangar in 1904. At this location they also developed a 9.1 m (30 feet) tall launching derrick for a 726 kg (1,600 lb) weight that, when dropped, launched the airplane from a track into the air to substitute for Kitty Hawk’s high sustained winds. The Wrights used their derrick system to launch their airplanes until 1910, when they added wheels to their models.

In 1905, the Wrights replaced their hangar of the previous year (moved to an adjacent property, it became a livestock shelter and disappears from the documentary record) with a similar (but slightly larger) frame structure. The Wrights razed this hangar before 1910, when they built a new wooden hangar near the intersection of the Yellow Springs and Springfield pikes for the use of their Wright Aeroplane Company (a modern replica of the 1905 hangar now stands near the site of the original structure). After the 1913 Dayton flood, the Miami Conservancy District constructed Huffman Dam, a dry dam across the Mad River approximately 2 km (1.2 miles) to the south of the flying field, placing the flying field within the dam’s floodplain and making substantive construction on it unwise. The Conservancy District razed the 1910 hangar – also used by the Wright School of Aviation in 1910 – in 1938. The United States military acquired the Huffman Prairie Flying Field in 1917 as part of the creation of Wilbur Wright Field (initially used as a site for pilot training during the First World War).

The U.S. military restricted public visitation to Huffman Prairie Flying Field during most of the twentieth century. As part of Wright Field and (after 1948) Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Huffman Prairie Flying Field served as the site of several temporary buildings housing airplane navigational equipment; technological obsolescence caused the Air Force to remove all such buildings during the early 1970s. The Secretary of the Interior designated the field a National Historic Landmark in 1990, and Congress made it a component of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park in 1992, the same year that the Air Force installed boundary markers and flags at the field’s corners.

The terrain of the Huffman Prairie Flying Field has changed little since the Wrights’ testing of airplanes since it lies within the floodplain of the Miami Conservancy District’s Huffman Dam, a dry dam built by the District between 1918 and 1921 across the Mad River to reduce the possibility of future flooding after the catastrophic 1913 Dayton Flood. Aside from the site’s historic significance, its presence within the dam’s floodplain severely restricts the types of development that the United States Air Force, the property owner, may undertake upon the site.

2. Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing:

Built for Abraham and Joseph Nicholas in 1886, the 22 South Williams Street building was home to a grocery store, feed store, saloon, and boarding house before its rental by Wilbur and Orville Wright from 1895 to 1897. After the Wrights moved their operations to 1127 West Third Street in 1897, and before 1911, the owners of 22 South Williams Street transformed their commercial structure into a residential duplex, removing the original storefront and display windows and installing a recessed exterior wall of novelty wood and bay windows in their stead. They retained the original front columns from the building’s west façade for a porch and built a new access stairway to the second floor from the porch. Bay windows replaced the north doorway and second-floor freight door, and the modifiers removed all of the building’s shutters and painted the exterior walls white.

Individuals connected with Dayton nonprofit Aviation Trail, Inc., revealed the Wright brothers’ connections to the 22 South Williams Street building in 1980. With the building in poor physical condition and facing imminent condemnation and removal by the City of Dayton, Aviation Trail acquired title to the property in 1982. From 1985 to 1988 Aviation Trail supervised the property’s rehabilitation to its 1895-1897 appearance, overseeing the replacement of the roof, paint and window removal, removal of nonhistoric exterior features and interior partitions, the reestablishment of historic doorways, and the replication and installation of new shutters. Aviation Trail opened the building as a public museum in 1988 and it became part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park in 1992. The National Park Service acquired title to 22 South Williams Street in 1995 and installed a new interior exhibit in 2004.

3. Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall:

The Wrights took approximately one month (May to June) to build their 1905 airplane, using data acquired through their 1903 and 1904 test flights to make the 1905 model more airworthy from the start of their flying season. However, they continued to modify it as their flying season progressed, enlarging and repositioning its rudder and elevator, unlinking its previously-connected wing-warping and rudder controls, and adding ‘little jokers,’ small angled surfaces to the trailing tips of the two propellers to prevent a deformation problem observed during flights in 1904. As a result of these changes (and also from additional practice in flying), the Wrights, as pilots, gained greater control of their airplane, enabling them to turn in the air and take off and land when they desired. With their airplane now controllable, in 1905 they set new world duration and distance records for controlled, powered flight in a heavier-than-air craft.

Attempting to assure the secrecy of the design of the 1905 airplane while pursuing a patent and while trying to sell the plane to governments in North America and Europe, the Wrights did not fly in 1906 and 1907 and placed the 1905 Flyer in storage. After reaching agreements with the United States Army’s Signal Corps and a French syndicate in 1908, the Wrights brought the 1905 Flyer out of storage, installed upright seating and controls for the pilot (in place of the original prone piloting position) and a new control system and shipped the airplane to Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. From 6 to 14 May, they made 22 flights with the 1905 flyer, including the first airplane flight in the world with

both a pilot and a passenger. After completing their tests at Kitty Hawk that May, the Wrights disassembled the 1905 Flyer and abandoned it in North Carolina. Orville returned to Kitty Hawk in 1911 to test a new glider model and considered returning to Dayton with the components of the 1905 airplane, but found its pieces scattered by animals and local souvenir hunters and decided instead to abandon the 1911 glider with its 1905 predecessor.

Shortly thereafter, Massachusetts paper manufacturer Zenas Crane wrote the Wrights, asking them to donate an airplane to the Berkshire Museum in Pittsfield. Orville responded that the Wrights had no intact airplane to donate but that Crane was welcome to contact Kitty Hawk residents and ask them to gather the scattered pieces of the 1905 airplane and 1911 glider for shipment to Massachusetts. Crane did so and acquired the 1911 glider and the wings, rudder, elevator, and miscellaneous pieces of wood and wire from the 1905 airplane.

After Berkshire Museum craftsmen inadvertently destroyed the 1911 glider by trying to rebuild it as the 1902 glider (as they did not have access to sketches for the craft), Orville refused to assist Crane in reconstructing the 1905 airplane or to send him its engine. Much of the 1905 airplane spent the next 35 years unassembled in Massachusetts; residents of Kitty Hawk held other significant pieces as souvenirs.

In 1946, NCR Chairman Edward Deeds, a Dayton businessman and friend of Orville’s, requested that Orville donate a Wright Flyer to the outdoor transportation museum Deeds intended to build in Dayton. Though he initially recommended that Deeds commission the construction of a replica of the 1903 Wright airplane, Orville reconsidered and suggested instead that Deeds attempt to obtain the parts of the 1905 airplane and rebuild it. Through the cooperation of Kitty Hawk residents who sent airplane elements to Dayton and the Berkshire Museum (which by the 1940s was an art and natural history museum with little interest in aviation), Deeds and Orville obtained approximately 85 percent of the original 1905 parts and used 1905-period tools and methods to craft replicas of missing parts. Deeds and Orville did not recover the airplane’s original muslin covering, but Orville supplied the restoration shop with additional bolts of the “Pride of the West” bleached muslin (albeit cloth first purchased in 1925, not 1905) of the same weight and weave that the Wrights used in 1905. Deeds engaged Harvey Geyer, a former Wright Company employee, to supervise the rebuilding and restoration of the airplane; Orville maintained significant involvement in the restoration project until his death in January of 1948. With the reconstruction and restoration project complete, Deeds’ Carillon Park placed the 1905 Flyer on exhibit in purpose-built Wright Hall in 1950. Wright Hall, a structure determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, is itself significant as a commemorative structure built with the initial consultation of Orville Wright; it was he who suggested that the 1905 airplane be exhibited in a shallow pit to allow visitors to view it from above. Since 1950, Carillon Park has publicly exhibited the Wright Flyer III in Wright Hall, an environmentally-controlled museum facility now part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park.

4. Hawthorn Hill:

Wilbur and Orville Wright submitted their initial design for Hawthorn Hill to the Dayton architectural firm of Schenck and Williams in 1912. After having professional architects revise the Wrights’ ideas, local contractors built the 2.5-storey brick mansion between 1912 and 1914. Orville moved into the house with his father, Milton Wright, and sister, Katharine Wright, in April of 1914. The house was Orville’s residence until his 1948 death; Milton Wright lived there until his 1917 death and Katharine resided with Orville until her 1926 marriage to Henry Haskell. The Wrights made no significant changes to Hawthorn Hill from its construction to Orville’s 1948 death and its sale. After its purchase of the property that year, the private, Dayton-based National Cash Register company redecorated much of the interior, painting stained surfaces, changing carpets and furnishings, and replacing draperies and chandeliers. However, all of the original decorative molding, pocket doors, wainscoting, mantels, ornamental plaster and glass, silver- and nickel-plated hardware, and the grand staircase remain intact, as do the original furnishings and room treatments in Orville’s library on the first floor. NCR installed two additional second-floor bathrooms for its guests to use when staying at Hawthorn Hill and installed a modern heating and air-conditioning system; otherwise, the interior structure of Hawthorn Hill has not changed since its 1914 completion. ________________________________________________________________________Cultural landscape

What have been the major aspects of the history of human activity in the area and their impact on the landscape?_____________________________________________________________________

Natural property

What are the most significant events in history or prehistory that have affected the property? How have humans used or affected it?

Explanation: This discussion can include changes in the use of the property and its natural resources for hunting, fishing or agriculture, or changes brought about by climatic change, floods, earthquake or other natural causes.___________________________________________________________________

Mixed property

Consider the questions raised just above for both natural and cultural properties.______________________________________________________________________

2.c. Boundary Selection

Propose a boundary for the property and explain why you chose it. Is the boundary reasonable on logical grounds, such as if it conforms to topography or landforms or (for

natural areas) to the range of wildlife or (for cultural properties) to any historical boundary or defining structures (such as walls)?

The proposed boundary follows the respective boundaries of the individual units of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park and the boundaries of the Hawthorn Hill property owned by the Wright Family Foundation (the respective sites’ National Historic Landmark boundaries), as shown on the accompanying maps. It conforms to relevant historic property boundaries.

The boundary of Huffman Prairie Flying Field is the irregularly-shaped area shown on the accompanying maps 1, 4, and 6. It corresponds to the boundaries of field during its usage by the Wright brothers.

The boundary of Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing is that of lot 7794, City of Dayton, with the exception of 25 feet (7.62 m) taken by parallel lines off the south side thereof, as described in Warranty Deed 12235, recorded July 27, 1983, and shown on maps 1 and 5.

The boundary of the Wright Flyer III is that of the Wright Hall unit of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, in which the airplane is permanently exhibited in Wright Hall at Carillon Park, Dayton, Ohio. It is shown on maps 1 and 4.

The boundary of Hawthorn Hill encompasses part of lot 93, beginning at a point in the middle of Park Avenue 2.85 chains (57.3 m) from the west end of Park Avenue, thence south 8º50’ east 458.2 feet (138.01 m) to a corner; thence north 85º50’ east 458.2 feet (138.01 m) more or less to the west line of Harman Avenue to a corner; thence north on the west line of Park Avenue 456.72 feet (139.21 m) to the point of beginning, City of Oakwood, Ohio, as recorded in Executor’s Deed on December 7, 1948. It is shown on map 2.

________________________________________________________________________

Are all the elements and features that are related to the site’s significance included inside the proposed boundaries?

Explanation: Careful analysis should be undertaken to insure that the proposal embraces the internationally significant resources and excludes most, if not all, unrelated buildings, structures and features.

YES: ___X______ NO: ________

If no, please explain: ____________________________________________________

Are there any enclaves or inholdings within the property and, if so, do they contain uses or potential uses contrary to the conservation or preservation of the site as a whole?

YES: _________ NO: ___X_____

If yes, please explain: ____________________________________________________

3. JUSTIFICATION FOR INSCRIPTION IN THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST

3.a. Criteria under which inscription is proposed

From the World Heritage criteria listed below, identify each criterion that you believe applies to your property and briefly state why you believe each criterion you have selected is applicable.

Explanation: You may find the discussion under this heading in “Appendix A” to the Guide to the U.S. World Heritage Program to be helpful in completing this section. Please refer to a paper copy or follow the hyperlink.

To be included on the World Heritage List, a site must be of outstanding universal value and meet at least one of these ten selection criteria in a global context:

i. represent a masterpiece of human creative genius;

____ This criterion applies to the property I am proposing

Reason:_________________________________________________________

ii. exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning or landscape design;

__X__ This criterion applies to the property I am proposing

Reason:

Huffman Prairie Flying Field is the site where in 1904 and 1905 Wilbur and Orville Wright’s research and development resulted in the invention of practical aviation through their construction of and experimental flights with the Wright Flyer III; it is the place where humanity learned to fly. The Wrights’ development of practical aviation, sparked at Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, revolutionized international socioeconomic and political affairs and communications and brought increased exchanges of human values; through its grandeur, Orville Wright’s home, Hawthorn Hill, symbolizes the swift development and the importance of aviation throughout the world. __________________________________________________________

iii. bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared;

____ This criterion applies to the property I am proposing

Reason:___________________________________________________________

iv. be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history;

____ This criterion applies to the property I am proposing

Reason:___________________________________________________________

v. be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change;

____ This criterion applies to the property I am proposing

Reason:___________________________________________________________

vi. be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance. (The Committee considers that this criterion should preferably be used in conjunction with other criteria);

____ This criterion applies to the property I am proposing

Reason:_________________________________________________________

vii. contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance;

____ This criterion applies to the property I am proposing

Reason:__________________________________________________________

viii. be outstanding examples representing major stages of earth's history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features;

____ This criterion applies to the property I am proposing

Reason:__________________________________________________________

ix. be outstanding examples representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems and communities of plants and animals;

____ This criterion applies to the property I am proposing

Reason: ______________________________________________________

x. contain the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation.

____ This criterion applies to the property I am proposing

Reason:______________________________________________________

3.b. Proposed statement of outstanding universal value

Based on the criteria you have selected just above, provide a brief Proposed Statement of Outstanding Universal Value summarizing and making clear why you think the property merits inscription on the World Heritage List. If adopted by the World Heritage Committee, the statement “will be the key reference for the future effective protection and management of the property.”

Explanation: This statement should clearly explain the internationally significant values embodied by the property, not its national prominence.

“Outstanding Universal Value” is formally defined as “… cultural and/or natural significance which is so exceptional as to transcend national boundaries and to be of common importance for present and future generations of all humanity. As such, the permanent protection of this heritage is of the highest importance to the international community as a whole.”

Cultural property

For example, a cultural World Heritage Site may be a unique survival of a particular building form or settlement or an exceptional example of a designed town or the best work by a great internationally recognized architect. It may be a particularly fine or early or rich survival and it may bear witness to a vanished culture or way of life, or ecosystem. Elements to consider for inclusion in the statement may be such cardinal facts about the site as:

- Historic Context- Period of International Significance- Internationally Significant Dates - Internationally Significant Groups, Persons, Events- Cultural Affiliation

This application may be said to include the largely intact site of the world’s first airfield and hangar; two intact buildings intimately associated with the Wright brothers, and the Wright Flyer III (1905), the world’s first practical airplane, restored under the partial supervision of Orville Wright and exhibited in a building designed through consultations with him before his 1948 death.

Huffman Prairie Flying Field is the site where in 1904 and 1905 Wilbur and Orville Wright’s research and development resulted in the invention of practical aviation through their construction of and experimental flights with the Wright Flyer III; it is the place where humanity learned to fly. The Wrights’ development of practical aviation, sparked at Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, revolutionized international socioeconomic and political affairs and communications and brought increased exchanges of human values; through its grandeur, Orville Wright’s home, Hawthorn Hill, symbolizes the swift development and the importance of aviation throughout the world. _____________________________________________________________________________________

Cultural landscapes

Such landscapes illustrate the evolution of human society and settlement over time under the influence of the physical constraints and/or opportunities presented by the natural environment and of successive social, economic, and cultural forces, both external and internal.

Natural property

For example, a natural World Heritage Site may be a unique existence of a type of habitat or ecosystem. It may comprise assemblages of threatened endemic species, exceptional ecosystems, outstanding natural landscapes or other natural phenomena. ____________________________________________________________________

Mixed property

A mixed property must be justified under at least one cultural criterion (i-vi) under 3a above and one natural criterion (vii-x) under 3a above. _____________________________________________________________________

3.c. Comparison of proposed property to similar or related properties (including state of preservation of similar properties)

Please provide a statement explaining how the property being proposed compares with all other similar or related properties anywhere in the world, whether already on the World Heritage List or not.

Explanation: Examples of questions that may be useful to consider include whether the proposed property is part of a series or sequence of similar sites belonging to the same cultural grouping and/or the same period of history. Also, are there features that distinguish it from other sites and suggest that it should be regarded as more, equally or jointly worthy than they are? What is it that makes this property intrinsically better than others and qualifies it for the World Heritage List? For example, does it have more features, species or habitats than a similar site? Is the property larger or better preserved or more complete or less changed by later developments?

It will be especially helpful if specific reference can be made to a study placing the property in a global context. The absence of comparative information may indicate that the property is either truly exceptional (a difficult case to prove) or that it lacks international importance. If the results of the comparative review reveal that multiple sites possess roughly comparable merit and may possess international significance as a group, you may wish to recommend that more than one site be proposed, as a serial nomination or as a joint nomination by the United States and another country.

Also please make note of any major works that evaluate the property in comparison to similar properties anywhere else in the world.

Of the 830 properties on the World Heritage List in early 2007, few address the history of technology and none address the world-changing role of practical aviation in the twentieth century. Huffman Prairie Flying Field and the related sites discussed in this application are distinguished from other early aviation sites in the United States (such as Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, the site of the Wrights’ first four flights, or the Indiana Dunes on the southern shore of Lake Michigan, site of Octave Chanute’s glider trials in 1896) or in Europe (particularly France) in their status as the birthplace of international practical heavier-than-air aviation through the development of flight control. The test flights of the Wright brothers in 1904 and 1905, during which they unlinked wing-warping and rudder controls, allowed a pilot full, independent control of the elevator and rudder and the consistent opportunity to make turns while airborne without stalling the airplane’s engine and to fly as long as the airplane’s fuel supply allowed.

While the Wrights’ first four flights in a controlled, heavier-than-air power-driven aircraft occurred at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, in December of 1903, practical application of the principles of flight did not occur until the Wrights started to use the Huffman Prairie Flying Field near Dayton as their testing ground. The pasture, owned by local banker Torrence Huffman, was the site of the first developmental airfield for heavier-than-air aircraft in the United States and the world.

The Wrights never tested their aircraft at the Indiana Dunes on the shore of Lake Michigan. However, in 1896 Wright correspondent Octave Chanute (1832-1910) tested gliders from dunes adjacent to the modern boundary of Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, a unit of the National Park System. The dunes from which Chanute and his assistants launched gliders no longer exist and are covered by modern roads and houses; the site is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places and does not retain integrity. The nearby Gary Bathing Beach Aquatorium (National Register, 1994) contains a museum examining the significance of Chanute’s lakeshore experiments.

During the years of the Wrights’ research and development at Huffman Prairie Flying Field, 1904 and 1905, motorcycles and their engines were the principal professional interests of future Wright competitor Glenn Curtiss (1878-1930; the shoreline of his testing area, Hammondsport, New York’s Lake Keuka, retains some of its early twentieth-century integrity). Samuel Langley (1834-1906), at the time the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, also attempted to achieve sustained, controlled flight with a heavier-than-air machine in December of 1903. Langley and his assistants launched their unsuccessful tests from a houseboat anchored in the Potomac River south of Washington, D.C.; while the Potomac still flows past Quantico, no in situ vestiges of his attempted flights remain.

Extant resources connected with early European aviators are few; British aviation historian Charles Gibbs-Smith’s The Rebirth of European Aviation, 1902-1908: A Study of the Wright Brothers’ Influence (London: HMSO, 1974) provides excellent comparative context concerning contemporary events in the United States and Europe. The first flight in Europe, by Brazilian Alberto Santos-Dumont, occurred in October of 1906, a year after the Wrights successfully flew their Wright Flyer III over Huffman Prairie until exhausting its fuel in October of 1905. The site of Santos-Dumont’s 1906 60m (200 ft) flight in Bagatelle, France, is today part of the Parc & Château de Bagatelle of Paris, which principally contains an eighteenth-century French estate and formal gardens. The flight is commemorated with a monument erected by the Aero-Club de France in 1910, but the site lacks landscape integrity concerning its aviation history; its landscape is managed as part of a formal French garden estate. Santos-Dumont used the field at Bagatelle for demonstrating his airplane; his (minimal) research and development activities into heavier-than-air craft occurred at a workshop in Neuilly, west of Paris. None of the French Centre des Monuments Nationaux’s Monument historiques commemorate France’s role (or the roles of others living in France) in the development of the airplane.

Aviation research and development elsewhere in Europe before Wilbur Wright’s demonstration flights in Le Mans, France, in 1908 (commemorated by a 1920 monument) did not result in achievements comparable to those of the Wrights at Huffman Prairie with the Wright Flyer III (or of Santos-Dumont at Bagatelle). However, several European sites connected with gliders important in the development of powered aviation still retain integrity. Among those sites are locations connected with Ferdinand Ferber’s gliding (in Beuil, Conquet, and Chalais-Meudon, France) and Lake Geneva, the site of tests of a float glider by the Voisin brothers of France in September of 1905.

The landscape of the Huffman Prairie Flying Field, discussed in further detail in From Pasture to Runway: Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, a 2002 National Park Service Cultural Landscape Report, underwent moderate but reversible changes after it served as the Wrights’ testing ground; it retains a high level of its historic integrity. It has high degrees of location, association, feeling and setting, and a significant level of design integrity, with intrusive features such as the bisecting Pylon Road easily removable.

Conversely, resources connected with the Wrights’ experimental glider and powered flights in North Carolina retain much less historic integrity. In 1928 the U.S. Coast Guard and local residents planted shrubs and sand grass in the sand dunes at Kill Devil Hill, where the Wrights launched their first flights, adding a non-period vegetative cover to the site while retarding the natural erosion and shifting of the dune through wind and rain. A 1980 nomination of the Kill Devil Hill site to the World Heritage Committee partially failed as a result of the site’s extensive landscape changes, including the complete reconstruction of the Wrights’ hangar and the presence of an intrusive memorial structure. The cultural landscape of Kill Devil Hill is examined in further detail in Wright Brothers National Memorial: Cultural Landscape Report, a 2002 National Park Service study.

It is difficult to provide comparisons to the Wright Flyer III; as the product through which the Wrights demonstrated their successful development of practical aviation at the Huffman Prairie Flying Field during the 1905 season it is a unique device. However, the evolution of the Wrights’ 1903 airplane from the Kitty Hawk flights to the 1904 Flyer and then the 1905 model is well-documented, and the 1905 airplane is comparable with its immediate Wright predecessors. Though all of the Wrights’ initial gliders and airplanes employed a basic Pratt truss structure, their constant experimentation and incorporation of the results of their experimentation resulted in many modifications to the designs of their crafts. The Wrights’ inability to substantially control their 1903 airplane (now exhibited in Washington, D.C., by the Smithsonian Institution at its National Air and Space Museum), which flew only four times in straight flights of less than one minute in length, caused many of the changes.

While they kept the general dimensions of the 1903 airplane, the Wrights’ research at Huffman Prairie in 1904 caused them to change the airplane’s center of gravity by moving the engine, radiator, fuel tank, and pilot position slightly to the airplane’s rear. They also changed the wing spars from spruce to white pine, widened the airplane’s

propeller blades and reduced the curvature ratio of the wings from 1 in 20 to 1 in 25. After these modifications made the 1904 airplane’s pitch nearly uncontrollable, they added 31.7 kg (70 lb) of ballast to its forward elevator. The Wrights also developed a catapult launching system so that they would be less reliant on the unpredictable Ohio wind when attempting to launch their airplane. However, no flight in 1904 exceeded six minutes in length, and the Wrights did not yet have an airplane they could fly until exhausting its fuel supply. The Wrights burned the wooden frame of the 1904 airplane and reused metal parts on the 1905 model and the 1904 airplane is not extant.

In 1905, the Wrights’ experiments caused them to build an airplane 2.1 m (7 ft) longer than their 12.3 m (40.4 ft) 1903 airplane. They reused the 1904 engine, added small, angled surfaces to the trailing edges of the propellers (“little jokers”) to offset deformation pressures, and disconnected the direct linkage of the airplane’s rudder and wing-warping systems, enabling separate controls for yaw and roll and overall control in three dimensions. Their most significant modifications came during the middle of the 1905 season at Huffman Prairie when, to try to maintain the pitch of the airplane and avoid catastrophic crashes, they rebuilt and moved the forward elevator. Previously 4.9 m² (52.75 ft²) in size, their experiments caused them to change the elevator’s size to 7.7 m² (83 ft²); it now was 3.6 m (11.7 ft) in front of the leading edge of the wing, instead of 2.2 m (7.32 ft). The extension of the elevator served the same purpose as did the ballast on the elevator of the 1904 airplane. The modifications completed in 1905 ended the series of hard, dangerous landings with broken airplane parts that had affected the Wrights, and made long flights commonplace for them and increased public interest in their work.

At the same time, European (chiefly French) aviators – principally Ernest Archdeacon, Ferdinand Ferber, Charles and Gabriel Voisin, and Louis Blériot – produced only a few unsuccessful gliders and could not repeatedly take off and land in a heavier-than-air craft; even Alberto Santos-Dumont’s 1906 14-bis airplane allowed control in only two dimensions during its flights at Bagatelle. An April 1907 crash destroyed the 14-bis; neither Santos-Dumont nor other interested parties restored the aircraft for exhibition. European aviators quickly incorporated the technological advances realized by the Wrights in the Wright Flyer III at Huffman Prairie into their airplanes after the Wrights’ European demonstration flights in 1908 and 1909. The French Musee de l’Air et de l’Espace at Le Bourget Airport near Paris exhibits replicas of several important early European airplanes, including a replica of Santos-Dumont’s 1908 Demoiselle aircraft, a 1919 replica of the Voisin Farman aircraft of 1907, and the original fuselage of Leon Levavasseur’s 1909 Antoinette. The Deutsches Museum in Munich displays a 1958 reproduction of Otto Lilienthal’s 1896 glider, while the Technisches Museum in Vienna has an authentic Lilienthal glider from 1892. Elsewhere, the Danmarks Tekniske Museum in Helsingør, Denmark, claims a 1906 craft of early Danish aviator J.C.H. Ellehammer, while the Romanian Muzeul Militar National in Bucharest claims a 1906 Trajan Vuia monoplane amongst its collection.

The Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing building in Dayton is the only intact structure in which the Wrights operated their bicycle business still in its

original location and is the location where the Wrights first conceptualized their approach to achieving practical flight. Few comparable extant resources connected with other early aviation pioneers exist. In the United States, no buildings connected with the aviation work of Octave Chanute, Samuel Langley or Glenn Curtiss retain significant integrity (though several buildings connected with Curtiss’s 1925-1928 development of Opa-Locka, Florida, are listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the National Register-listed Gary Bathing Beach Aquatorium commemorates Chanute’s nearby experiments on the beaches of Lake Michigan). Research uncovered no French Monuments historiques commemorate early French aviators or aviators of other countries working in France. In Petropolis, Brazil, Alberto Santos-Dumont’s home is a historic house museum but represents his later life and not the period when he conceptualized his vision of flight. In Anklam, Germany, the Otto Lilienthal Museum commemorates the life of the town’s native son; however, this museum does not include buildings directly connected with the work or profession of the German glider. Research found no other early aviation resources in Germany on accessible lists of registered monuments maintained by the German Länder.

Hawthorn Hill is the only intact residential structure connected with Orville Wright (and, in its initial design phase, Wilbur Wright before his 1912 death) as an adult. It reflects the socioeconomic status of Orville Wright in the decades after his invention of the airplane and his role as a senior figure in international aviation. It is best compared with such properties as the General William (“Billy”) Mitchell House in Middleburg, Virginia or the Captain Edward V. Rickenbacker House in Columbus, Ohio, both residences of famous U.S. military aviators (and neither open for public visitation), or residences of significant inventors, such as Samuel Colt’s Armsmear in Connecticut (now a retirement home for the elderly), or Henry Ford’s Fair Lane home (now owned by the University of Michigan-Dearborn and open for public visitation). No residences of Glenn Curtiss remain intact. Internationally, A Encantada, the home of Alberto Santos-Dumont built in 1916 in Petropolis, Brazil, and principally connected with that aviator’s later life, is most comparable to Hawthorn Hill. It is operated by the city of Petropolis as a historic house museum and is open for public visitation and retains a high degree of its early twentieth-century integrity. Research uncovered no residences of other aviators active in Europe before 1908 that are preserved as tangible connections to their residents of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.______________________________________________________________________

3.d. Integrity and/or Authenticity

Explanation: As with a site’s international significance, the clear intent of this requirement is that a World Heritage Site’s authenticity or integrity must rise to a superlative level. Thus, for example, it is quite important to understand that reconstructions of historic structures or sites or largely restored ecosystems will usually be disqualified from inscription in the World Heritage List.

Cultural property

Authenticity: Does the property retain its original design, materials, workmanship and setting?

YES: ___X______ NO: ________

Comment: ____________________________________________________________

Integrity: Do the authentic material and spatial evidence inside the proposed boundaries remain in sufficient quantity to convey the full significance of the site? To tell the full story of why the site is outstanding? Is the integrity weakened by the intrusion of discordant and/or abundant elements or buildings that are unrelated to the significance and detract from the visual unity of the place?

YES: ___X______ NO: ________

Comment: “Yes” for all sites concerning the first two questions; “No” to all sites concerning the third question.

Note that that there can be authenticity without integrity, as in a highly eroded archaeological ruin. There can also be authenticity with full integrity of materials, but seriously undermined by the overwhelming presence of newer or inappropriate elements.

How do authenticity and integrity compare for this property?

The Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall, and Hawthorn Hill all retain authenticity and integrity. As described in a site integrity assessment in From Pasture to Runway: Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base Cultural Landscape Report (2002), the Huffman Prairie Flying Field retains integrity of location, association, feeling, and setting. It has not been relocated from its authentic, historic boundaries (which it retains) and can be distinguished from its contemporary settings. There is a direct link between the historic events and persons with which the Flying Field is associated, and the landscape expresses the aesthetic sense of its period of significance due to the enduring historic views of the remaining open meadow and the texture created by grassy vegetation, which also preserves its physical setting. The Flying Field also retains much integrity of materials and design; stone Flying Field boundary markers postdate the Wright era, and the replica wooden 1905 hangar contains the same materials used by the Wrights in their construction of the original structure. The open meadow of the Flying Field no longer shows evidence of its alternate usage as a cow pasture during the Wright era.

The Wright Flyer III retains integrity of design, being exhibited in the same configuration as it was flown in 1905 and is the authentic airplane flown that year. Though it is no longer located at the Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Dayton History at Carillon Park exhibits the airplane in a building designed with extensive contributions from Orville

Wright before his 1948 death. It has a medium to high level of integrity of materials; it retains approximately 85% of its authentic 1905 structure. It retains integrity of workmanship; even though the airplane was in pieces for more than thirty years, Orville Wright initially oversaw its 1947-50 restoration before its exhibition at Carillon Park, and the artisans who directly restored the plane used appropriate tools and methods from the early twentieth century and the same type of spruce wood as used in 1905. It also retains integrity of feeling, retaining sufficient original material to provide viewers an excellent sense of the period of time in which the Wrights built it. Orville Wright also participated in designing Wright Hall; the display of the Wright Flyer in Wright Hall has not changed since its installation after its restoration in 1950.

Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing also retains most of its Wright-era (1895-1897) exterior integrity. Its structure retains its original bricks; its window treatments are modern reproductions based on the building’s appearance in an 1896 photograph (the only known visual documentation of the building during its occupancy by the Wrights), while the building also maintains integrity of time and place in its setting and location in a west Dayton neighborhood (the West Third Street National Register Historic District). It is the only authentic, intact property still in its original location associated with the Wrights’ bicycle sales and manufacturing careers and one of two authentic, intact buildings connected with their printing business. The building’s interior, now used by the National Park Service for a museum and offices, underwent extensive modifications during the twentieth century during a conversion from a commercial structure to a residential duplex and from a residential duplex to a museum and office structure, but the first floor retains its Wright-era flooring.

Hawthorn Hill also retains its Wright-era (1914-1948) integrity and is the only authentic residence of Orville Wright as an adult still standing. Aside from the addition of two small second-floor bathrooms to accommodate NCR guests and improvements to the building’s heating and cooling systems, the interior structure is little changed from Orville Wright’s time and retains its original materials and fixtures. NCR redecorated and repainted many of the rooms, but those changes are reversible and do not affect the integrity of the structure itself. Hawthorn Hill’s exterior is maintained to its 1948 appearance. The yard surrounding Hawthorn Hill, though not managed as a cultural landscape, also maintains its period integrity, with dead plants being replaced with plants of the same species, and the surrounding Oakwood neighborhood retains its period residential character._______________________________________________________________________

Repairs: If repairs have been made, were they carried out using traditional materials and methods? If yes, please discuss. If not, please explain the methods used and why.

YES: __X_______ NO: ________

Comment: Resource-specific repairs to the Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, and Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and

appropriate sections of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and generally accepted museum object conservation standards. Reproductions of the 1905-era wire and wood post fences surround Huffman Prairie Flying Field, and visitors encounter a replica 1905 hangar structure. Replacement windows and doors at the Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing building use wood and glass replicating that seen in the sole surviving Wright-era (1896) photograph of the structure, while the 1947-1950 repairs to the Wright Flyer III – initially supervised by Orville Wright – used muslin identical to that used in 1905 and the same type of spruce wood used by the Wrights in the plane’s original construction. Workers repairing Hawthorn Hill over the past 90 years have used the same materials used in the building’s original construction.______________________________________________________________

Cultural landscapes:

Authenticity: Does the property retain its distinctive character and components?

YES: _________ NO: ________

Comment:_______________________________________________________________

Natural property

Are there intrusions by non-native animals or plants and are there any human activities that could compromise the property’s condition?

YES: _________ NO: ________Comment:_____________________________________________________________

If efforts are being made to conserve or restore a site or ecosystem, what is their nature and are scientifically directed measures being used? If the site comprises a unique ecosystem or habitat values, is the area proposed of sufficient size and configuration to contain as complete a representation of an ecosystem or habitat as is practicable or reasonable?

Nature of conservation or restoration measures:______________________________

Proposed area is sufficient:

YES: _________ NO: ________

Comment:____________________________________________________________

Mixed property

Does the property’s authenticity or integrity rise to a superlative level?

YES: _________ NO: ________

Comment:___________________________________________________________

4. STATE OF PRESERVATION AND FACTORS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY

4.a. Present state of preservation of the property

Cultural property

What is the present state of preservation of the property (including its physical condition and preservation measures in place)?

Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, and Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall are preserved as part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, which is a part of the U.S. National Park System. Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park is governed by all U.S. laws and regulations pertaining to the preservation of historic properties within the National Park System, including the Antiquities Act of 1906, the Historic Sites, Buildings and Antiquities Act of 1935, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, and the park-specific Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act of 1992, as amended. Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing is on Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park’s List of Classified Structures. Additionally, all three properties are National Historic Landmarks and subject to biennial condition reports submitted to the National Park Service’s National Historic Landmarks Program. Though it is a National Historic Landmark, Hawthorn Hill is not a part of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park and is not subject to National Park Service-related law. All of the sites are part of the National Aviation Heritage Area, which provides additional resource awareness among the public, though no specific preservation measures.

All of the units of the proposed Dayton Aviation Sites nomination are in good physical condition None face any imminent physical, environmental, or structural threats. _______________________________________________________________________

Are there any recent or forthcoming planned major repair projects? Are there any major repairs needed to buildings or structures that have not been planned or financed?

There are no recent or forthcoming planned major repair projects for these properties, nor are there any major necessary repairs that have not been planned or financed.

______________________________________________________________________

Cultural landscapes:

What is the present state of preservation of the property (including its physical condition and preservation measures in place)?

_______________________________________________________________________

Are there any recent or forthcoming planned major repair projects? Are there any major repairs needed to buildings or structures that have not been planned or financed?

YES: _________ NO: ________

Comment:_____________________________________________________________

Natural property

What is the present state of conservation of the property (including its physical condition and conservation measures in place)?_______________________________________________________________________Are there data on species trends or the integrity of ecosystems and are there any on-going or planned interventions to restore natural conditions (e.g., to restore altered topography or manage invasive species and/or restore native ones)?

YES: _________ NO: ________

Comment:_______________________________________________________________

Mixed property

What is the present state of preservation of the property (including its physical condition and preservation measures in place)?_______________________________________________________________________

Are there any recent or forthcoming planned major repair projects? Are there any major repairs needed to buildings or structures that have not been planned or financed? Are there data on species trends or the integrity of ecosystems and are there any on-going or planned interventions to restore natural conditions (e.g., to restore altered topography or manage invasive species and/or restore native ones)?

YES: _________ NO: ________

Comment:______________________________________________________________

4b. Factors affecting the property

If there are known factors likely to affect or threaten the outstanding universal values of the property or there any difficulties that may be encountered in addressing such

problems through measures taken, or proposed to be taken, please use the following is a checklist to help in identifying factors.

(i) Development Pressures (e.g., encroachment, modification, agriculture, mining)

Are there development pressures affecting the property? Or major changes in traditional land use? Or demographic shifts, especially in sites still in the hands of the descendants of their creators, or, for example, traditional ethnic communities.

YES: _________ NO: _X______

Comment:_____________________________________________________________

(ii) Environmental pressures (e.g., pollution, climate change, desertification)

Are there major sources of environmental deterioration currently affecting the property?

YES: _________ NO: __X______

Comment:_____________________________________________________________

(iii) Natural disasters and risk preparedness (earthquakes, floods, fires, etc.)

Are natural disasters likely to present a foreseeable threat to the property? If so, are there available background data (e.g., for a property in a seismic zone, give details of past seismic activity, or the precise location of the property in relation to the seismic zone, etc.)

YES: _________ NO: _X_______

Comment:

While the Huffman Prairie Flying Field lies within the floodplain of the Mad River as a result of the construction of the Miami Conservancy District’s Huffman Dam, the dam is a dry dam and stores water on its northern Huffman Prairie Flying Field side only during rare periods of extended rainfall. Such situations are of minimal threat to the integrity and authenticity of the Huffman Prairie Flying Field. _______________________________________________________________

Are there contingency plans for dealing with disasters, whether by physical protection measures or staff training?

YES: __X_______ NO: ________

Comment: Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park Emergency Procedures, July

2005 – addresses procedures for handling building evacuations, bomb threats,

earthquakes, emergency and non-emergency utility failures, fires, hazardous material spills, and tornados and other inclement weather within NPS-operated units of the national park. During emergencies at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, the U.S. Air Force bars public access to Huffman Prairie Flying Field.

______________________________________________________________

(iv) Visitor/tourism pressures

If the property is open to visitors, is there an established or estimated "carrying capacity" of the property? Can it absorb or mitigate the current or an increased number of visitors without significant adverse effects?

YES: ________ NO: __X_____

Comment: Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park does not have established carrying capacities for its resources or units, nor does Hawthorn Hill. The park’s annual visitation of approximately 50,000 people spread among its four units (including the Paul Laurence Dunbar State Memorial, which is not a party to this application) does not rise to the level of affecting the carrying capacity of its resources; it can likely absorb two to four times more visitors than it presently receives but needs to conduct additional research to identify a precise carrying capacity. ___________________________________________________________

(v) Other

Are there any other risks or threats that could jeopardize the property’s Outstanding Universal Values?

YES: _________ NO: _X_______

Comment:___________________________________________________________

5. PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT

5.a. Ownership

Provide the name(s) and addresses of all owners:

Huffman Prairie Flying Field: United States Air Force, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433

Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing: National Park Service, Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, 16 South Williams Street, Dayton, Ohio 45402

Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall: Dayton History, 1000 Carillon Boulevard, Dayton, Ohio 45409

Hawthorn Hill: Wright Family Foundation, c/o Dayton Foundation, 2300 Kettering Tower, Dayton, Ohio 45423

_____________________________________________________________________

If any of these owners are corporations or other nongovernmental entities, identify which are public and which private. Identify any traditional or customary owners.

Public organization owners: United States Air Force (for Huffman Prairie Flying Field); National Park Service (for Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing)

Private organization owners: Dayton History (for Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall); Wright Family Foundation (for Hawthorn Hill)

Traditional or customary owners:_____________________________________________

If there are any other authorities with legal responsibility for managing the property, provide their names and addresses:

_______________________________________________________________________

For properties having multiple owners, is there any representative body or agent which speaks for all owners? If so, does that representative body or agent have authority to act on behalf of all the owners? If so, provide the name and address of that representative body or agent:

The owners of the sites included in this application authorized the superintendent of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park to speak for the collective group regarding this application but did not authorize him carte-blanche authority. No single property owner has the authority to act on behalf of any other owner unless all of the owners collectively allocate that permission._______________________________________________________________________

Are there any restrictions on public access to the property?

Explanation: Public access is not required for inclusion in the World Heritage List. Policies in effect should be explained, however. )

YES: __X_______ NO: ________

Comment: Units of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park are open to the public during posted business hours. However, Huffman Prairie Flying Field is occasionally closed by Wright-Patterson Air Force Base officials for United States Air Force activities on the surrounding base. The Wright Family Foundation intends to open Hawthorn Hill for public visitation during the summer of 2007.

___________________________________________________________

5.b. Protective designations

What are the principal existing (and pending) legal measures of protection that apply to the property?

Explanation: List, but do not attach copies of, all relevant known or proposed legal, regulatory, contractual, planning, institutional and/or traditional measures that affect the status of the property: e.g., national park, wildlife refuge, historic monument, zoning, easements, covenants, deed restrictions, State and local historic preservation ordinances and regulations, and the like.

List of measures:

Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act of 1992: Established Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park as a National Park Service unit, protecting Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, and Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall.

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966: This act established additional programs for the preservation of historic properties throughout the nation and establishes a system to classify properties on or eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places (and established the National Register). This act establishes that prior to approval of an undertaking that will adversely affect resources eligible for or listed in the National Register, the approving federal agency must evaluate the effects of the undertaking and afford the State Historic Preservation Officers and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation an opportunity to comment on the undertaking. The act also provides for reviews at the state and federal level. It was amended by P.L. 94-422 (Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, as amended, to establish the National Historic Preservation Fund) to require the development of professional standards for preservation of historic properties, require the heads of all federal agencies to assume responsibility for the preservation of historic properties that they own or control, direct agencies to use historic properties, allow agencies to lease a historic property to ensure preservation, restructure the Advisory Council, and direct the Council to promulgate regulations for any exemption from requirements.

Historic Sites, Buildings and Antiquities Act of 1935: This act directs the secretary of Interior to carry out wide-ranging programs in the field of history and places with the secretary the responsibility for national leadership in the field of historic preservation. It authorizes the Historic American Buildings Survey, Historic American Engineering Record, and National Survey of Historic Sites and Buildings.

Antiquities Act of 1906: This act provides for the protection of historic or prehistoric remains and sites of scientific value on federal lands, establishes criminal sanctions for unauthorized destruction or removal of antiquities,

authorizes the president to establish national monuments by proclamation, and authorizes the scientific investigation of antiquities on federal lands, subject to permit and regulations. Passage of the Archeological Resources Protection Act (1979) supersedes the Antiquities Act as an alternative federal tool for prosecution of antiquities violations in NPS areas.

Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979: This act secures the protection of archeological resources on public or Indian lands by regulating the excavation and collection of resources and fostering increased cooperation and exchange of information between private, governmental, and professional communities. The act defines archeological resources to be any material remains of past human life or activities that are of archeological interest and are at least 100 years old. It also requires the notification of Indian tribes prior to issuing permits for activities at sites which may be of religious or cultural importance to them.

National Park Service Act of 1916: Established the National Park Service as an agency within the Department of the Interior, giving it responsibility for managing national parks within the United States.

National Historic Landmark Listing, Huffman Prairie Flying Field, 1990: Designated Huffman Prairie Flying Field as an NHL, requiring that before approval of any federal undertaking which may directly and adversely affect the NHL, the head of the responsible federal agency shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions as may be necessary to minimize harm to the NHL and shall afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on the undertaking. It also requires the NPS to periodically report the NHL’s condition to Congress.

Memorandum of Agreement 508 between Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, National Park Service, 2005: Establishes an agreement between WPAFB and the NPS to establish roles, responsibilities, and guidelines regarding operation and support of the Huffman Prairie Flying Field, with the NPS responsible for site interpretation and the U.S. Air Force responsible for ensuring that undertakings comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.

National Historic Landmark Listing, Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, 1990: Designated Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing an NHL, requiring that before approval of any federal undertaking which may directly and adversely affect the NHL, the head of the responsible federal agency shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions as may be necessary to minimize harm to the NHL and shall afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on the undertaking. It also requires the NPS to periodically report the NHL’s condition to Congress.

National Historic Landmark Listing, Wright Flyer III, 1990: Designated Wright Flyer III as an NHL, requiring that before approval of any federal undertaking which may directly and adversely affect the NHL, the head of the responsible federal agency shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions as may be necessary to minimize harm to the NHL and shall afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to

comment on the undertaking. It also requires the NPS to periodically report the NHL’s condition to Congress.

National Historic Landmark Listing, Hawthorn Hill, 1991: Designated Hawthorn Hill as an NHL, requiring that before approval of any federal undertaking which may directly and adversely affect the NHL, the head of the responsible federal agency shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions as may be necessary to minimize harm to the NHL and shall afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on the undertaking. It also requires the NPS to periodically report the NHL’s condition to Congress.

City of Dayton Zoning Ordinance, rev. October 2006: Documents the ways in which land may be used within the City of Dayton (affecting Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing and Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall); Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing is within an area zoned multiple-family residential and borders an area zoned as a historic district; Carillon Park, the location of Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall, is zoned as open space.

Wright-Dunbar Village Business District Design Guidelines, 2002: These guidelines establish standards for exterior renovations occurring within the Wright-Dunbar Village Business District and supplement the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Rehabilitation; the guidelines affect Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing.

City of Oakwood Zoning Ordinance, 2000: Documents the ways in which land may be used within the City of Oakwood (affecting Hawthorn Hill); Hawthorn Hill is within an area zoned as a single-family residence district.

West Third Street Historic District, National Register of Historic Places, 1989: Added the West Third Street to the National Register of Historic Places, increasing public awareness of the area surrounding the Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing property and informally enhancing its future preservation.

West Third Street Historic District, City of Dayton, 2000: Defines the West Third Street Historic District (including the Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing Property) as a unit under the City of Dayton’s zoning code.

Give the title and date of legal instruments and briefly summarize their main provisions. Provide the year of designation and the legislative act(s) under which the status is provided.

Titles, dates, and brief summaries of legal instruments:

Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act of 1992: Created Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park as a unit of the National Park System from the Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, Wright Flyer III/Wright Hall, and the Paul Laurence Dunbar State Memorial.

Hawthorn Hill: Deed 06-078740, 25 August 2006 – transferred ownership of Hawthorn Hill from the National Cash Register Company to the Wright Family Foundation.

Are the protections in perpetuity or are there potential gaps in the protection?

YES: __X_______ NO: ________

Comment: Protections for the Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, and Wright Flyer III exist in perpetuity. Legislation to develop perpetual legal protection for Hawthorn Hill by adding it to Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park is currently under development by the Aviation Heritage Foundation and the Wright Family for submission to Congress._____________________________________________________________

Are there any traditional ways in which custom safeguards the property?

YES: _________ NO: _X_______

Comment: _____________________________________________________________

5.c. Means of implementing protective measures

Will the owner(s) be responsible for ensuring that the nominated property will be protected in perpetuity, whether by traditional and/or statutory agencies? If no, identify who will be responsible.

YES: _X________ NO: ________

Responsible entity other than the owner: ___________________________________

What is the adequacy of resources available for this purpose? Please briefly explain your reasoning.

Adequate resources are available for the foreseeable future for the Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, Wright Flyer III, and Hawthorn Hill. The National Park Service directly funds the perpetual protection of Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing through its annual Operations of the National Park System appropriation to Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park. Through the annual appropriation provided the Department of Defense, the U.S. Air Force funds the perpetual protection of the Huffman Prairie Flying Field; it also maintains a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA-508) with the National Park Service describing its duties towards site preservation. Resources for the preservation of the Wright Flyer III, owned by the private nonprofit Dayton History, come from Dayton History’s general budget, which in turn is reliant on the Deeds Trust (administered by the

Dayton Foundation), individual memberships, and museum admissions for its funding. Funding for the Wright Family Foundation comes from fees charged licensees for commercial use of the Wright brothers’ names and images; ensuring the continued preservation of Hawthorn Hill is the Foundation’s principal activity._____________________________________________________________________

5.d. Existing plans related to municipality and region in which the proposed property is located (e.g., regional or local plan, conservation plan, tourism development plan)

Explanation: List, but do not attach, plans of which you are aware that have been officially adopted or are currently under development by governmental or other agencies that you believe directly influence the way the property is developed, conserved, used or visited. Include the dates and agencies responsible for their preparation and describe their general nature, including whether they have the force of law. It is recognized that this information may be difficult to compile and that it may be difficult to decide what to include, but the information will be very useful in determining how well the property is protected.

CitiPlan Dayton: The 20/20 Vision (Comprehensive Plan), City of Dayton, 1999/revised 2003 (City of Dayton Department of Planning and Community Development): While it does not specifically mention the Wright Flyer III or Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, this comprehensive plan will be used by the City Commission and City Administration to set policy direction, establish service priorities (as the basis of the budget process) and act as a guideline for land use and zoning decisions within the city of Dayton (in which two of the components of the proposed World Heritage listing lie) and updates to its zoning code. CitiPlan 20/20 also gives the Commission and Administration a road map for working with neighboring jurisdictions and other public and private organizations.

Comprehensive Plan, City of Oakwood, 2004: Oakwood’s official policy guide for physical improvement and development. It considers not only the immediate needs of the community, but also projects improvement and development 10 to 15 years into the future. While the plan does not address Hawthorn Hill directly, it focuses on the needs of a “mature” community and strives to maintain and enhance the traditional form, character, and distinguishing features of Oakwood, while still promoting high-quality and compatible improvements and new developments in selected locations.

National Aviation Heritage Area Draft General Management Plan, January 2007: addresses the protection, enhancement, and interpretation of the natural, cultural, historic, scenic, and recreational resources for the entire National Aviation Heritage Area (of which the Huffman Prairie Flying Field, Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, Wright Flyer III, and Hawthorn Hill are components), established as a National Heritage Area in 2004. Aviation

Heritage Foundation managers expect the finalization of the plan by July of 2007. This plan does not have the force of law.

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base General Plan: Provides guidance for the operations of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base; includes a section concerning the operation of the Huffman Prairie Flying Field and Air Force collaboration with the National Park Service, elaborating on Air Force responsibilities for site maintenance and preservation and NPS responsibilities for site interpretation.

______________________________________________________________________

5.e. Property management plan or other management system

Is there a formal management plan or other management system for the property? If yes, when was it last updated? If not, is one in preparation and when will it be completed? (It is not necessary to provide copies, but a summary can be included if one is available.)

YES: _X________ NO: ________

Comment: Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park General Management Plan,

1997/amended 2007. According to alternative C, the NPS’s preferred plan alternative, workers would construct a new access gate to Huffman Prairie Flying Field, easing visitor circulation between it and the nearby Huffman Prairie Flying Field Interpretive Center; a kiosk for increased interpretation and a hangar for a replica Wright B airplane would be built near (but not on) the Huffman Prairie Flying Field. Management of the Wright Flyer III would continue to reside with Dayton History as a legislated park partner, with the NPS providing technical assistance, while the NPS would maintain ownership and interpretation of Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing. Since Hawthorn Hill is not a component of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, the GMP does not address its management.

The Wright Family Foundation, which gained ownership of Hawthorn Hill in August of 2006, is evaluating management alternatives and has not yet established a management plan for that site.______________________________________________________________

Is this management plan or other management system being effectively implemented?

YES: _X________ NO: ________

Comment: ___________________________________________________________

6. MONITORING

Because monitoring the condition of a property is not essential to a decision as to whether a property meets the basic qualifications for nomination to the World Heritage List, no information about the property’s monitoring program is being requested at this time. If the property is subsequently added to the U.S. Tentative List, a set of key indicators for assessing the property’s condition, the arrangements for monitoring it, and information on the results of past monitoring exercises will be required to complete the l nomination of the property for inscription on the World Heritage List,.

7. DOCUMENTATION

7.a Photographs, slides, and other audiovisual materials

If recent images (prints, slides and/or, where possible, electronically formatted images, videos and aerial photographs) are available that give a good general picture of the property, please provide a few photographs and/or slides. If available, film/video, or electronic images may also be provided. They should give a good general picture of the property and illustrate the qualities/features that you believe justify the nomination of the property to the World Heritage List. (Ten views or so should be adequate for all but the most complicated properties.)

Please label the images you supply and provide a separate list of them here, including the photographer’s name. Please do not include any copyrighted images or other images to which you do not possess the rights or do not have permission.

Images being supplied and names of their authors:

1. Huffman Prairie Flying Field, January 2007 (National Park Service; “Photo 1”)2. Huffman Prairie Flying Field, January 2007 (National Park Service; “Photo 2”)3. Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, December 2006 (National Park Service; “Photo 3”)4. Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing, December 2006 (National Park Service; “Photo 4”)5. Wright Flyer III, October 2002 (Carillon Historical Park; “Photo 5”)6. Hawthorn Hill, June 2003 (National Park Service; “Photo 6”)_________________________________________________________________________

8. CONTACT INFORMATION

8.a. Preparer/Responsible Party for Contact:

Name: Edward Roach

Title: Historian

Address: Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, P.O. Box 9280

City, State/Territory, Zip Code: Dayton, Ohio 45409

Telephone: 937 225 7705

Cellular phone: 937 673 8691

Preferred Days/Hours for Contact: M-F, 8:00-3:30

Fax: 937 222 4512

E-mail and/or website: edward_roach@nps.gov

8.b. Responsible Official or Local Institution/Agency

If different from the preparer above, provide the same information for the agency, museum, institution, community or manager locally responsible for the management of the property. In the case of public property, identify both the responsible official and the agency. If the normal reporting institution is a national agency, please also provide that contact information.

Name: Lawrence Blake

Title: Superintendent

Address: National Park Service, Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, P.O. Box 9280

City, State/Territory, Zip Code: Dayton, Ohio 45409 Telephone: 937 225 7705

Cellular phone: 937 287 1424

Fax: 937 225 7706

E-mail and/or website: lawrence_blake@nps.gov

9. Signatures of All Owners of Private Properties or Authorizing Officials for Public Properties:

Explanation: No property will be included in the U.S. World Heritage Tentative List without the written concurrence of all its property owners. This is because U.S. law expressly forbids nomination of such sites. In addition, at the time of nomination, property owners must pledge to the legal protection or the development of legal protection of the property in perpetuity.

DIRECTORS OF THE WRIGHT FAMILY FOUNDATION ___________________________________Stephen Wright Date ___________________________________Amanda Wright Lane Date

THE DAYTON FOUNDATION PLUS REALTY TWO, LLC,an Ohio limited liability company By:___________________________________Michael M. Parks DatePresident of Dayton Foundation Plus, Inc., its sole member

(Please attach as many additional signature pages as may be necessary.)

9. Signatures of All Owners of Private Properties or Authorizing Officials for Public Properties:

Explanation: No property will be included in the U.S. World Heritage Tentative List without the written concurrence of all its property owners. This is because U.S. law expressly forbids nomination of such sites. In addition, at the time of nomination, property owners must pledge to the legal protection or the development of legal protection of the property in perpetuity.

___________________________________________________________________Signature

Mary A. BomarTyped or Printed Name

Director, National Park Service ______________________________________________________Title

Date (Please attach as many additional signature pages as may be necessary.)

9. Signatures of All Owners of Private Properties or Authorizing Officials for Public Properties:

Explanation: No property will be included in the U.S. World Heritage Tentative List without the written concurrence of all its property owners. This is because U.S. law expressly forbids nomination of such sites. In addition, at the time of nomination, property owners must pledge to the legal protection or the development of legal protection of the property in perpetuity.

___________________________________________________________________Signature

Brady KressTyped or Printed Name

President and Chief Executive Officer, Dayton History____________________________________Title

Date (Please attach as many additional signature pages as may be necessary.)

9. Signatures of All Owners of Private Properties or Authorizing Officials for Public Properties:

Explanation: No property will be included in the U.S. World Heritage Tentative List without the written concurrence of all its property owners. This is because U.S. law expressly forbids nomination of such sites. In addition, at the time of nomination, property owners must pledge to the legal protection or the development of legal protection of the property in perpetuity.

___________________________________________________________________Signature

Typed or Printed Name

____________________________________________________________________________Title

Date (Please attach as many additional signature pages as may be necessary.)