Hannah Clark House

Here follows an excerpt from the Fairfax County Park Authority Resident Curator website:

The Hannah P. Clark House is a two-story, cross-gable vernacular farmhouse with 1,250 square feet of finished space. Features include vertical-peeled-log framing construction and a living room with exposed ceiling beams.

The period of significance for the house is 1876 to 1925, the period during which Hannah Potter Clark constructed, expanded, moved and resided in the house. The house was constructed circa 1876 during Virginia’s Reconstruction Period after the Civil War. The house sits on a 1-1/4 acre wooded parcel on the edge of Old Colchester Park and Preserve. The house is conveniently located near Lorton in southern Fairfax County with easy access to the I-95 and Route 1 transportation corridors. The property contains the historic house and a 1986 studio which was used by artist Janos Enyedi.


<•>•<•>•<•>•<•>•<•>•<•>•<•>•<•>
<•>•<•>•<•>•<•>•<•>•<•>•<•>•<•>

Introduction:
The Hannah P. Clark House is located northeast of the historic town of Colchester in Fairfax County, Virginia on the lower half of the seventeenth-century Bourne patent. The house is on land that once was a part of Hannah P. Clark’s family property, Colchester Farm. The earliest portion of the house was constructed circa 1876 on land she purchased adjacent to Colchester Farm. Due to the early twentieth-century expansions and improvements to the railroad, Hannah P. Clark was forced to move her house across the road to where it stands today. Colchester Farm was comprised of parcels in, and adjacent to, the town of Colchester that James Potter, Hannah P. Clark’s father, had accumulated during the second quarter of the nineteenth century. Land holdings similar to Colchester Farm dominated the landscape of southern Fairfax County during the nineteenth century. After the colonial port town and the nineteenth-century farming community of Colchester declined in population, structural density, and urban commerce, a few local families, like the Clarks, provided continuity in the evolving community on the Occoquan River. Other than the mid eighteenth-century Fairfax Arms, the Hannah P. Clark House is the only known surviving house in Colchester’s immediate vicinity that was constructed before 1900.

Colchester Farm:
In 1839, James Potter and John Allison made an agreement with Tholemiah Berry’s heirs to purchase Berry’s Colchester land. The deed was not officially recorded until 1849 when Allison’s heirs likely needed the deed to settle Allison’s estate (FXCO DB 1849 R3:147. Berry’s heirs to Potter and Allison). The land conveyed was 376 acres, excepting the seven acre reserve for Samuel Dean and a one acre reserve for the family burying ground. Also included in the deed were two lots of ground within the town of Colchester. James Potter’s portion of the land would later be known as Colchester Farm. This would be the eventual location where his daughter, Hannah P. Clark, moved her house.

The division between Potter and Allison was not documented in the land tax records until 1848 (FXCO LTR 1848 James Potter and John Allison) (Figure 7). By this time Allison had already sold the northern part of his half of the land. In 1843, Allison sold approximately 49 acres of his land to John B. Reardon (FXCO DB 1843, 1870, 1875 S4:378 Allison to Reardon; Shaffer, Wilson, Sarver & Gray 2008:2.9). Potter was taxed for 188 acres at Colchester and Allison was taxed for his remaining 139 acres on Massey Creek. Allison owned substantial amounts of land along the shores of the Occoquan River and its tributaries. Allison and Reardon were business partners and together they owned the Sandy Point tract on Mason Neck. They leased fisheries and harvested and shipped firewood by boat to Alexandria (FXCO CFF Susp1A 1883-032. Allison heirs v. Reardon heirs).

Little is known about the early years of James Potter’s life, who his parents were or if he had any siblings. A William Potter, Sr. was documented as residing in Colchester from at least 1812 until 1833. There is no known connection between William Potter and James Potter other than name, proximity, and in the 1820 census there was a male in the correct age range for James Potter residing in William Potter’s household (US Census 1820 Virginia: Potter, William). An early documented mention is a muster roll of a James Potter serving as a private for the 60th VA militia during the War of 1812 (Sprouse 1996:1569). There is not enough information to know if this is the James Potter in Colchester or the James Potter who owned land up the road near Accotink (FXCO CFF 74P 1859 Potter v. Potter).

James Potter was born in Virginia around 1798 (US Census 1850 Virginia: Potter, James). Although it is not known if he was born near Colchester, or when he moved into the neighborhood, it is clear he was living there by 1828 when he was about 30 years old.

In 1828, Potter entered into an agreement with Daniel Lee, a landowner adjacent to Colchester, for 25.75 cords of pine wood to be cut and delivered from Lee’s land to Potter for market. Both Lee and Potter felt the other had not followed the agreement and the subsequent court judgments resulted in an extended court dispute spanning the decade from 1829 to 1839. The disagreement focused on the timing of the delivery of wood and the quality of said wood for market (FXCO CFF 1853-006 cff97 ee Lee v Potter).

The first record of Potter owning land in Colchester is in 1833. He was taxed for owning two town lots with buildings valued at $90. Over the next 22 years he continued to acquire land in and around Colchester, gathering and consolidating land parcels to create Colchester Farm. By 1835, Potter purchased a one acre parcel adjacent to Colchester. In 1839, Potter purchased the majority of the land for Colchester Farm from Tholemiah Berry.

James Potter found himself involved in another court case when he was caught in a dispute between Hancock Lee and Edward Sangster over debts and an enslaved negro blacksmith named Ephraim (FXCO CFF 1835-007 cff59 bb Lee v Sangster etc.). In 1834, James Potter and Robert Kirby purchased Ephraim and his blacksmith tools from Sangster who held him as security from Lee for debts unpaid. Lee objected and Ephraim was returned to Lee. However, the debts were still in dispute and Potter and Kirby were left with nothing from their purchase. In September 1835, a final judgment was reached that Lee owed Potter and Kirby $92.14 which included their purchase price of $80 and the costs of the court case. Although Potter’s money was returned, he had not obtained the skilled blacksmith and the economic benefits that would have been derived from that investment.

During the 1840s, Potter continued to add to his town holdings and purchased two of the smaller Bourne Patent parcels that had been split off years before. This included four more town lots, Linton’s two acres at the corner of the Ox and Old Stage Roads, and Samuel Bayly’s 10.5 acre reserve. The 1840 population census lists James Potter as a head of household with six other residents including two free colored males, one teenager and one in his twenties (U.S. Census 1840 Fairfax, Virginia: Potter, Jas). Five of the residents were engaged in agriculture. This is also likely the first time Barbara Beach is recorded as living with James Potter. James Potter and Barbara Beach never married but lived as man and wife for more than twenty years until Potter’s death in 1865. Their oldest child might have been a boy named Henry. In 1840, the population census listed a boy under the age of 5 and then in 1850 it listed a 12 year old boy named Henry [Beach]. It is not known if Henry was James Potter’s son since he does not appear again in Potter’s household and is not referred to in his will. Hannah Beach/Potter, their oldest known child, was born a few years later in February 1845 (U.S. Census 1900 Fairfax County, Virginia: Clarke, Hannah).

In 1848, the Fairfax County land tax records began to refer to James Potter’s farm as “Colchester”. Potter and Beach had two more children, Cornelius Beach in 1851 and Joseph Beach in 1852 (U.S. Census 1860 Fairfax County, Virginia: Potter, James; Joseph Potter gravestone Dabney Community Cemetery). The 1850 U.S. Census Slave Schedule recorded Potter as owning four people of color, one 60-year old mulatto male, one 19-year old black female, and two infant black children. Also in 1850, the Agricultural Schedule recorded Potter’s farm as being worth $1000 with 68 acres of improved land and 120 acres of unimproved land (U.S. Census 1850 Agricultural Schedule Fairfax County, Virginia:195 James Potter). Compared to his local neighbors Potter appeared to have a small to mid-sized farm in terms of land, livestock, and crops. He raised cattle, sheep and pigs. In the fields, he planted a variety of crops including wheat, rye, corn, oats, and buckwheat.

During the early 1850s Potter purchased additional town lots. He was taxed for 213 acres and nine town lots in 1857 when the land tax records consolidated his multiple land holdings. Four additional town lots, 4, 7, 13, and 29, were in Potter’s possession during the 1850s but further research is needed to determine when he sold them (FXCO DB U3:191). Of the original 42 platted lots only 30 town lots were taxed in 1858 and they were divided amongst only five owners (FXCO LTR 1858 Colchester). It is likely that the five owners of land within the historical town boundaries consolidated some of the lots which would account for the reduction in numbers. The majority of the taxed lots were held by only three owners, John Hughes with 10; Lewis Weston with 7; and James Potter with 9.

In 1860, on the eve of the Civil War, James Potter’s Colchester Farm was prospering. The value of his livestock and crop products had doubled from 1850 (Sprouse 1996: 1568). The farm was valued at $1500 and his personal property at $2000. Potter was 63 years old and Barbara Beach was 50. Hannah, 14, and Cornelius, 9, were attending school and William Weston, 25, was living with them and working as a laborer. Potter still owned three slaves, the black female who was now 30 years old and a black boy and girl ages 10 and 12 (U.S. Census 1860 Slave Schedule Fairfax County, Virginia: Potter, James).

Virginia seceded from the Union in 1861 and soon after the residents of Colchester found themselves in the midst of the Civil War. No major battles took place in this part of Fairfax County but the land between the Occoquan River and the Accotink Creek became tense ground, caught between the front lines of the opposing forces. After the war one Union officer described the scene on Mason Neck: “The two streams were the picket lines of the respective armies. The region between was debatable ground. Scouting parties from either side would enter this ground. Small parties under cover of night would steal inside the opposing picket line.” (Inashima 2011:3). Such excursions led to many minor skirmishes and the waterways were watched closely for boats moving people or goods to either side.

One such skirmish took place in Colchester the night of January 29, 1862. Reports of the incident varied widely, from taking place at Mrs. Lee’s house or James Potter’s house; Union troops stormed a dancing party or a slumbering household; one dead or over ten dead (Inashima 2011:22-23; Sprouse 1977:117-119). All of the stories agreed that Texas Rangers were in Colchester when the Union troops entered town to capture them the night of the 29th. Both James Potter and James Clark, Hannah Potter’s future husband, were arrested either that night or the next day for being involved in the incident and for suspected secession sympathies (The Local News [TLN], Alexandria VA, 30 January 1862:1; TLN, 31 January 1862:1). The next month Harper’s Weekly even illustrated the dramatic scene.

In the spring of 1862, an entry in Robert Sneden’s diary, a Union Army mapmaker, described the area:
“All the earthworks and batteries on the other side of the Occoquan and on its steep banks had been deserted. In Colchester very few people were seen, and these only old men...Many houses on the road were entirely deserted. Fences were few. No live cattle of any kind were seen. Doors were hanging by one hinge and the whole country looked deserted everywhere outside the villages of Colchester and Accotink.”

The official map that Sneden drew of the January 1862 picket lines illustrate that the town of Colchester was now just one street of buildings extending from the Ox Road intersection down to the river. What little was left of the buildings of the colonial port town of Colchester had been decimated by time, economics, and now war.

Sneden’s map also depicts the location of the Potter house east of the intersection of Ox Road and the Old Stage Road (Kings Highway/Old Colchester Road). This places the Potters as living not on any of their town lots but rather on the edge of Colchester Farm. It appears to be near the boundary of Bayley’s 10.5 acre parcel and the 188 acres purchased from Berry. If the house was located on the 10.5 acres, it is possible the Potters lived in one of Colchester’s eighteenth-century houses. In the 1773 deed of sale of this land it included a dwelling house, store kitchen, and salt house (FXCO DB 1773 L1:238 Heaton to Meredith).

The period after the war presented many challenges for the residents of Fairfax County who were struggling to reconstruct their houses, farms, and communities. The decade following the war was especially difficult for the Potter family who lost three of the family members to illness. James Potter wrote his last will and testament shortly after the end of the Civil War, on Nov. 19, 1865 (FXCO WB 1865 Z1:448 James Potter). He died before the end of the month (FXCO CFF 1867-042 cff 15j Clarke v Beach). In his will, Potter bequeathed to his three children Hannah, Cornelius, and Joseph his personal property to be equally divided (except for two cows for the boys). His land he left only to the two boys to be equally divided. Barbara Beach “the mother of my three children” he bequeathed a support for her natural life and he appointed her as executrix of his estate. For Hannah he also bequeathed her a support from the estate and one hundred cords of wood per year. At the time of Potter’s death, Hannah was 20, Cornelius was 14, and Joseph was 13 years of age. Since the boys were still minors Barbara Beach had full control of the estate.

Less than a month after her father’s death Hannah Potter and James Clark were married in Washington, D.C. on December 12, 1865 (FXCO CFF 1893-003 cff 20gg Clark v Clark). The marriage license was signed by the pastor of a small Methodist mission church called Providence Chapel (FXCO CFF 1893-003 cff 20gg Clark v Clark; Johnson 1857:121). James Clark was 23 years old and the oldest son of John Clark (U.S. Census 1870 Fairfax County, Virginia: Clark, John). The Clarks owned a small farm up the road near Lewis Chapel. After their marriage Hannah and James lived on the Clark farm and James worked as a boatsman (U.S. Census 1870 Fairfax County, Virginia: Clark, James). Most of the men on Mason Neck were listed as either farmers or boatmen in the 1870 population census. Fisheries dotted the coastlines of the waterways in southern Fairfax County and most of the product, whether it was fish, timber, or grain, was moved by boat to larger markets such as Alexandria.

One year after James Potter’s death James and Hannah Clark obtained an injunction against Barbara Beach (FXCO CFF 1867-042 cff 15j Clarke v Beach). On December 14, 1866, Hannah Clark made an oath charging that her mother, Barbara Beach, was not following the terms of James Potter’s will. Clark stated that Beach had not accounted for any of the estate or provided any of the support due Hannah as outlined in the will. Beyond that, Beach had taken possession of all of the land and personal property and profited of the agricultural products of the past year. Also Beach had employed four men to cut down large numbers of trees for market. The timber on the property was Hannah Clark’s only security for her annuity listed in the will.

Before February 1867, when Barbara Beach was to appear in court over this dispute, she died (Sprouse 1996:1569; FXCO COB 1867:9). After her death Robert Wiley, a prominent neighbor, was appointed as administrator for both James Potter’s and Barbara Beach’s estates (FXCO WB A2:300, A2:428 Barbara Beach Estate accounts; FXCO WB A2:305 James Potter Estate accounts). Barbara Beach left no recorded will and the only items that appeared in her estate inventory were the crops that the farm had produced since James Potter’s death (FXCO WB A2:300). James Potter’s estate was first appraised in May 1866 and it included a fairly detailed inventory of the livestock and farming implements. However, the inventory of the household furniture and objects was lacking considering it was for a household of five people and only three chairs were listed (FXCO WB A2:132). A second appraisal was made of Potter’s estate after Barbara Beach’s death and was recorded in the January Court 1868 (FXCO WB A2:301). The second appraisal included substantially more household items, which appear to be more appropriate for a household of five on a successful farm. This inventory included four beds, ten chairs, multiple tables and bureaus, kitchen furniture, stoneware, andirons, spinning wheel, mortar etc.

The account records for James Potter’s estate show that, due to a number of outstanding bills and notes in his name, most of his personal property needed to be sold to settle his accounts in order to keep the land intact (FXCO WB A2:301; A2:427). The list of sales of his property was recorded at the 1868 January Court. This provides a third, even more detailed inventory of his personal property. Approximately half of the purchases were made by local neighbors and included most of the livestock and farming equipment. Both James and Hannah Clark made separate purchases. Hannah Clark bought about a third of her father’s estate and James Clark bought about a sixth. Together they bought mainly furniture, kitchen wares, and a few farm related items such as the bee hives, 26 fowl, and one sow. Cornelius and Joseph Potter, both still minors, were not recorded as purchasing any of the personal property.

Since Joseph Potter was still a minor when his mother died, he lived with his sister Hannah on the Clark farm. It is unknown where his brother Cornelius was living. Cornelius (Beach) Potter did not appear in the 1870 population census. Cornelius Potter’s death in 1874 was recorded in the Fairfax County death register. James Clark reported that Cornelius died unmarried at the age of 22 of a congestive chill (Sprouse 1996:1570). His death made Joseph Potter the sole heir for the Colchester Farm land.

In 1875, Joseph Potter married Emma Weston, the daughter of Lewis Weston who owned much of the land within the town of Colchester and just to the north (Sprouse 1996:1570). The following year Joseph and Emma Potter sold the northern 65 acres of Colchester Farm to his sister Hannah Clark (FXCO DB V4:31 1876 Potter to Clark). In 1880 Joseph and Emma were living on Colchester Farm but had not brought it back to the agricultural production levels that his father had in 1860 (U.S. Census 1880 Population and Agricultural Schedules Fairfax County, Virginia: Potter, Joseph). Although the farm was now just 148 acres Joseph Potter only had 30 tilled acres and in 1879 had only grown crops on one-and-a-half acres. Compared to his father who grew a variety of crops, Joseph only grew a small amount of wheat and potatoes. His livestock was limited to two milch cows and their calves, and 20 poultry.

By 1883, Joseph and Emma Potter were no longer residing at Colchester Farm. That year, Joseph Potter was listed as an Alexandria resident in a deed that turned over Colchester Farm to Robert Wiley as trustee for Emma Potter (FXCO DB 1883 C5:11 Potter to Wiley and Potter). Emma Potter was also described as an Alexandria resident in an 1887 deed when she sold three acres of Colchester Farm to her sister-in-law Amanda Weston (FXCO DB 1887 G5:140 Potter to Weston). At some point after 1880 the Potter family home on Colchester Farm disappeared from maps. In 1920 a Rambler article in The Sunday Star reported, “The Potter house at Colchester was destroyed by fire many years ago.” (Shannon 1920:83). It is possible that the destruction of their house prompted Joseph and Emma Potter to move away from Colchester. In 1888, Emma Potter used Colchester Farm as collateral for a one year promissory note for $200 to John T. Downey, Trustee (FXCO DB 1888 H5:191 Potter and Wiley to Downey). At the end of this deed Emma Potter also waived the benefits of the Homestead Exemption for her debts. Two years later in 1890 Emma Potter sold Colchester Farm to the same John T. Downey for $900 (FXCO DB 1890 J5:362 Potter, Wiley to Downey). Emma and Joseph Potter do not appear in any U.S. population census after 1880. Joseph Potter was buried in 1929 in the same cemetery as his sister Hannah P. Clark in Prince William County, across the Occoquan River from their family home, Colchester Farm (Dabney Community Cemetery, Woodbridge, Virginia).

Railroad:
Up until 1872 there was no connecting rail line from Quantico, Virginia to Alexandria, Virginia. Two charters had been issued for a through rail service from Richmond, Virginia to Washington, D.C., one in 1851 and another in 1864 (Griffin 1994:24). Neither charter produced a physical rail connection and Virginia travelers still had to depend on transferring to Potomac River steamboats for their north/south journeys. This left Colchester isolated in the middle of this rail-less region. The Pennsylvania Railroad took over the 1864 Alexandria and Fredericksburg Railway charter and in July 1872 the connection was completed (Griffin 1994:24). Freight and passenger rail service ran across the Occoquan River with stops on both sides. The rails ran past Colchester just north of the historic town boundaries and bisected the Potter’s farm (FXCO DB 1870 93:108 Potter to Alexandria and Fredericksburg Railway).

The railroad opened up new opportunities for local residents. Rail freight service quickly grew and allowed perishable crops to be reliably moved from rural regions to the city and manufactured goods shipped to formerly isolated areas. Local residents also were also able to reach Alexandria and Washington, D.C. quickly, which opened new job markets and school possibilities. In the 1880 population census, almost all of the male residents in the Colchester vicinity were listed as farmers or farm laborers, with a number of house carpenters, and a few railroad workers (U.S. Census 1880 Lee and Mount Vernon Districts Fairfax County, Virginia).

Clark House & Farm, 1876 - 1925:
Hannah and James Clark had been married for over 10 years before Hannah P. Clark purchased land for their future home. During their marriage Hannah had seven children, four of whom survived into adulthood (FXCO CFF 1893-003 cff 20gg Clark v Clark: Hannah P. Clark deposition). In 1867 their oldest son Cornelius Franklin (Frank) was born, followed by Charles Augustus (Babe) in 1871, Sallie in 1874, and Samuel in 1876 (U.S. Census 1870, 1880, 1900 Fairfax County, Virginia: Clark, Hannah P.; Joan Peed, personal communication 2012). While she was pregnant with Samuel in 1876, Hannah P. Clark purchased two pieces of land near Colchester (Figure 11). The larger parcel was the 65 acres transferred on February 11, 1876 from her brother Joseph Potter and his wife Emma (FXCO DB 1876 V4:31 Potter to Clark). The land was the northern piece of her father’s Colchester Farm, bounded by Old Colchester and Ox Roads. It was divided roughly in half by the construction of the railway a few years earlier. Hannah exchanged her annuity of 100 cords of wood per year from her father’s will for 65 acres of the land that her brother inherited.

The second smaller parcel consisted of 2.33 acres at the southwest corner of the intersection of the railway and Ox Road. This land was directly across the road from the 65 acre parcel. Hannah P. Clark purchased the land on August 1, 1876 for $70 from Edgar and Susan Lee (FXCO DB 1876 V4:141 Lee to Clark). It was subdivided from land on the upper half of the Bourne patent that once belonged to Edgar’s mother, Mary Lee (FXCO LTR 1874 Edgar W. Lee). According to land tax records, there were no buildings on either the 65 or 2.33 acre parcels that Hannah P. Clark purchased (FXCO LTR 1878 Hannah Clark; 1877-1878 James Potter Estate; 1877-1878 Edgar W. Lee).

According to a sworn statement that Hannah P. Clark made in 1893, James Clark had “contributed little or nothing to the support of his family...[she] has had to depend on her own exertions” for support (FXCO CFF 1893-003 cff 20gg Clark v Clark: Hannah P. Clark deposition). This is reflected in the documents recorded in the Fairfax County deed books during the 1870s and 1880s. The land purchases and financial loans were all signed by Hannah P. Clark as the sole or primary party.

On the same day Hannah P. Clark purchased the 2.33 acre parcel she also signed two notes for $100 each (FXCO DB 1876 U4:93 Clark to Wiley; FXCO DB 1884 E5:271 Wiley to Clark). One note was to be paid to Joseph Edelin in one year and the second note in two years. This was recorded in a deed of trust with Robert Wiley who was to hold the land in trust until the money had been repaid in full by the Clarks. Wiley released the land back to Hannah Clark in 1884. Edelin was a local house carpenter and in 1876 he purchased and resided on land adjacent to Joseph Potter in Colchester.20 Joseph Edelin also appeared in a deed when Edgar Lee sold the remainder of his land south of the railway in 1878. The 2.33 acre parcel was excepted in the sale and was noted as being in the possession of a “Joseph Edglen” (FXCO DB 1878 X4:238 Lee to Haislip) (Figure 12). Hannah Clark’s promissory notes with Joseph Edelin were likely payment for constructing a house on the 2.33 acre parcel sometime between Clark’s 1876 purchase and 1878. By 1878/1879 the Hopkins map depicted a house constructed on that land and labeled it as “Hannah Clark”

Hannah P. Clark’s house was constructed in multiple phases. Exact years are not known for the additions but the sequence of construction can be established by existing physical evidence. General time periods can be surmised by the construction sequence, changes in the building valuation in the land tax records, and surveys/plats of the land.

The Period I section of the house was constructed as a one room plan, two-story house. The house was located on the 2.33 acre parcel adjacent to the railway. The walls, second floor ceiling joists, and roof rafters were framed with peeled saplings/logs. The sills and first and second floor joists are hand-hewn timbers. This vernacular type of framing, using mainly peeled and lightly hewn logs, was likely quite common since it required relatively minimal manual labor compared to log cabins or full timber framing. However, very few examples survive or are known about since it was likely used in small or modest houses that have been since demolished or buried inside multiple additions and expansions. Most known examples of vertical log/pole framing are in log houses (porches and roofs) or agricultural structures where the framing is visible.21 Since the house is no longer on its original foundation it is not known what material was used for the first foundation or if there was a cellar. Little of the original finishes of the Period I structure survive other than the siding. The house was covered with circular-sawn plain siding attached with machine cut nails. The interior had lath and plaster walls. The windows appear to be mixed in their configuration. A window on the east wall that was removed in 1993 consisted of a two-over-two window which was popular during the late nineteenth century. All of the other surviving windows in the Period I section of the house are six-over-six windows. The first floor room had 3.5 inch tongue-and-groove pine strip floor boards and the second floor had wide random-width pine floor boards. There was likely a staircase in the southeast corner. A wood stove by the staircase on the first floor provided the only heat for the house (Joan Peed, personal communication 2012).

Hannah Clark was first taxed for a building on her land in 1881; however, during that time period in Virginia there was often a delay between improvements and taxation.22 In 1880, the population census recorded the Clarks living in the neighborhood of Colchester (U.S. Census 1880 Lee Township Fairfax County, Virginia: Clarke, James). James Clark was no longer working as a boatman and instead reported his occupation as farmer. The 1880 agricultural schedule illustrates that the Clarks were mainly subsistence farming, leaving most of their acreage as woodland (U.S. Census 1880 Agricultural Schedule Fairfax County: Clark, James). In 1880, James Clark reported a value of only $15 for farm products as opposed to his brother-in-law’s, Joseph Potter, $600 (U.S. Census 1880 Agricultural Schedule Fairfax County: Potter, Joseph). Clark had 12 acres of tilled land but no reported crops. His only livestock were two milch cows which produced 50 lbs. of butter and 13 poultry which produced 30 dozen eggs. Although at the time of the census in 1880 the Clarks did not have any sows/hogs, James Clark was taxed for hogs from 1867 to 1878 and again from 1883 to 1884 (FXCO PPT 1867-1884: Clark, James).

From 1880 to 1882 James Clark did not report any personal property to be taxed. In 1881, 1882, and then from 1885 forward, Mrs. Hannah Clark was taxed for the family’s personal property. James Clark last reported the family’s personal property for taxation in 1884 (FXCO PPT 1867-1893: James Clark and Mrs. Hannah Clark). It is possible that this time period was the substantive beginning of their martial trouble which eventually led to their divorce in 1893. In 1883 “Hannah P. Clark and James Clark, her husband” borrowed $100 from Henry F. Duty (FXCO DB 1883 C5:175 Clark to Duty). The Clarks used the 65 acre parcel as security for the loan reserving “the right to sell the cord wood and timber now upon the said land, the proceeds of which to be applied to the payment of the [loan].” (FXCO DB 1883 C5:175 Clark to Duty). Henry F. Duty was a blind sailor who lived across the Occoquan River in Prince William County (U.S. Census 1880 Prince William County, Virginia: Duty, Henry). It is unknown if this money was used by the Clarks to finish repaying the 1876 notes held by Wiley or used to finance the construction of the Period II section of the house. Either way, Hannah P. Clark re-paid the money owed Wiley in 1884 and Duty in 1885 (FXCO DB E5:271 1884 Wiley to Clark; 1885 Duty to Clark). This released both parcels of land back to Hannah P. Clark.

The building value on the 2.33 acre parcel increased by $50 in 1885 and then again in 1890. There were no other substantial increases in building value until 1914, after the house was moved to its current location (FXCO LTR 1884-1914: Hannah Clark). When the house was delineated in a railway survey in 1903 (Figure 21), the house had an “L” shaped plan suggesting that the 1885 value increase was the Period II addition and the 1890 value increase was the Period III addition (FXCO DB 1903 N6:30A Railway Survey). Since the existing two-story addition and the one-story kitchen addition do not connect in any way there is no physical evidence to suggest which addition was constructed first.

The building chronology is complicated by two more factors. The first is that the building footprint proportions seen in the 1903 and 1913 railway surveys (Figures 21 and 23) suggest that the smaller kitchen addition was not constructed attached to the original Period I section of the house where it currently exists, but rather it was attached to the later two-story addition. Of course it is possible that the delineator of the surveys could have reversed the footprint or was not precise about the proportions of the “L” shaped plan. The second factor is that although the older windows and trim in the existing kitchen appear to date to the late nineteenth century the existing kitchen roof framing dates to after 1909.23 It is possible that it is either an addition built after 1909 to replace the “L” seen in the railway surveys, or that because the house was moved down the road on logs in 1913 the kitchen needed repair or partial reconstruction. Further investigation including paint analysis and exposing the wall and floor framing will be needed to answer these questions.

The Period II and III floor plans described here are based on the scenario that the two-story addition was constructed first, but the order could also be reversed. It is likely that Hannah P. Clark would have wanted the larger two-story addition first, since after 1885 the number of people living in the house started to decrease. From circa 1880 to 1885 Hannah and James Clark and their four children lived in the house. In 1887 James Clark moved out of the house permanently and lived as a boarder with neighbors (FXCO CFF 1893-003 cff 20gg Clark v Clark). Around 1890 both of her older sons married and also moved out of the house.

The circa 1885 two-story Period II addition to the house approximately doubled its size. It was constructed with circular sawn lumber for the framing. The construction of the addition reconfigured the whole floor plan. The small staircase in the southeast corner of Room 101 was removed and replaced by a new larger staircase between Room 100 and Room 101. Walls were constructed on the second floor to subdivide bedrooms. Decorative millwork typical of the late nineteenth century was used throughout the second floor and for the staircase banister and newel post.

The millwork on the first floor of the addition, Room 100, is plain board surround, but the interior window sills included a very modest decorative molded edge. It is unknown if the millwork in Room 101 was plain board or decorative since none of the early trim survives in that room other than the Period II staircase and the closet door, D114, which uses both plain board and the decorative O type molding. In both the Period I and Period II rooms of the house, 2.5 inch tongue-and-groove wood strip flooring was installed. A ghost in the floor boards on both the first and second floor of the Period II addition suggest a chimney stack was located along the north wall at one time. In the 1940s there was a wood mantel behind the wood stove in the Period I first floor room. This was likely added along with the other decorative millwork in the 1880s once the staircase was moved, providing the space for a decorative mantel piece

The Period III addition was likely constructed by 1890 when the tax value increased again. It was built as a frame one-story kitchen (Figure 19). The trim used was plain board surround. No evidence of a chimney or pipe stack exists but it might have been removed after the roof was reconstructed in the 1910s. At some point, likely during the late nineteenth or early twentieth century, porches were constructed on both the front and rear of the house. They had turned porch posts and decorative brackets in the corners.

In 1893, at the age of 48, Hannah P. Clark filed for a divorce from James Clark citing a lack of support, desertion, and brutal treatment. At the time of the divorce Frank and Charles had married and moved out of the house, Sallie and Samuel were living at home but Samuel worked away from home (FXCO CFF 1893-003 cff 20gg Clark v Clark). In her bill of complaint Hannah stated that before James Clark’s desertion of the family in 1887, his treatment towards her had been cruel and he had threatened bodily harm. Her complaints were supported by depositions given by E. Brown, a neighbor, and Sallie Clark, their daughter. E. Brown stated that he had known Hannah and James Clark for 30 years. Since James Clark left the house he had been boarding with the two older sons and various neighbors. Brown continued by saying that Clark drank and he had “seen him pretty full, heap of times.” Sallie Clark stated that her father “would get drunk right often...[and] he would curse my mother and use very profane language...I heard him threaten to pour coal oil on her and set her afire.” Brown and Sallie Clark both stated that Hannah P. Clark was the one who provided support for the family. (FXCO CFF 1893-003 cff 20gg Clark v Clark) The divorce was granted and Hannah P. Clark retained all of the land, personal property, and custody of the minor children. John T. Clark paid the court fees on behalf of his brother. Both in 1900 and in 1910 the population census recorded James Clark as living in his son Charles Clark’s household, first working as a fisherman and then working odd jobs (U.S. Census 1900 and 1910 Fairfax County, Virginia: Clark, James).

Unfortunately none of the Clarks’ 1890 census records survive. However, that time period can be partially reconstructed based on the divorce documents, tax records, and the 1900 census. For Hannah P. Clark 1890 was the year that she reported the largest amount of personal property to be taxed including one horse, one cow, one wagon, one clock, one sewing machine, and household furniture (FXCO LTR 1890 Mrs. Hannah Clark). Each year subsequent she reported fewer items until 1893, the year of the divorce, when she started to only report the household furniture. It is possible that as her sons grew older she turned over much of the land and livestock management to them. Around 1890 both Frank and Charles Clark were married and moved out of Hannah P. Clark’s house. In 1891, both of them had their first child (U.S. Census 1900 Fairfax County, Virginia: Clark, Frank and Charles Clark). Over the next two decades Hannah P. Clark legally transferred parts of the 65 acre parcel to her two older sons but they likely were already living in their own houses on her land. In 1896, Frank Clark purchased 4.2 acres from his mother and then another adjacent 5.75 acres in 1909 (FXCO DB A7:410 Clark to Clark; FXCO DB D7:350 Clark to Clark). Charles Clark purchased six acres from his mother in 1902 but began paying taxes on 4.5 of those acres in 1898 (FXCO DB 1902 M6:589 Clark to Clark; FXCO LTR 1898 Clark, Charles). Buildings were listed for both Frank and Charles when they began to pay land taxes in 1896 and 1898 (FXCO LTR 1896 Frank Clark; 1898 Charles Clark). Their houses were located east of Hannah P. Clark’s house along a driveway off Old Colchester Road (Joan Peed personal communication 2012; Charles Clark personal communication 2012).

By 1900, all three of Hannah P. Clark’s sons were working for the railroad company (U.S. Census 1900 Fairfax County Virginia: Charles Clark, Frank Clark, Samuel Clark). Frank was the railroad watchman, Charles was the railroad foreman, and Samuel was a railroad laborer. Sallie had married one of their neighbors from childhood, Walter Smith (U.S. Census 1880 Fairfax County and 1900 Prince William County: Smith, Walter). They lived across the Occoquan River in Prince William County where Walter Smith worked as a telegraph operator. The railroad was opening up new opportunities for the residents along its route and became heavily used for both freight and passenger service. The increased rail traffic soon overwhelmed the original single line track. Between 1902 and 1907 the line between Richmond and Washington was double tracked and sections were re-graded and straightened to improve service (Griffin 1994:28). In the Colchester area the railway land expansion went through in 1903 (FXCO DB 1903 N6:30). This land expansion claimed a strip of Hannah P. Clark’s land along the south side of the railway and brought the railroad even closer to the house.

Hannah P. Clark continued to be a presence in her community and twice made it into Washington, D.C. newspapers. In 1904, a man attempted to burglarize Hannah’s house. The sheriff who was supposed to take the burglar from Colchester to the police station was unable to do so. And so Hannah and one of her sons apprehended and took the man themselves to the station in Alexandria that same night (The Washington Times, 11 February 1904:4). A year and a half later Hannah P. Clark was included in a lengthy news notice about a big Fourth of July party at her neighbors the McElroys. The McElroys owned the riverfront farm (the former Lee property) just northwest of Colchester and the railway line. They hired multiple railroad cars to bring their guests to Colchester from Washington and Alexandria. The party included elaborate decorations, food for 100, and ceremonies. Hannah Clark was mentioned as receiving thanks from the crowd as the gingerbread artist who made and served “the great cards of gingerbread such as ‘mother used to make,’ and such as are familiar to all Southern tables.” (The National Tribune, 12 July 1906:5). By 1910, Hannah P. Clark was living on her own but had a growing number of grandchildren living just across the road. Samuel Clark was still working for the railroad company, had married, and moved to Washington City.

A New Location, circa 1913 - 1925:
In 1913 the Washington Southern Railway Company once again decided to change the railroad in the Colchester area. The railway line was being straightened and improved. In Colchester, the railroad bridge across the Occoquan was abandoned and a new bridge was built closer to Colchester. This changed the railway alignment through the Clark property prompting another survey and taking of land (FXCO DB 1913 P7:425 Clark to Washington-Southern Railway Company). This time the railway did not just come closer to the house but instead ran along the south side (Figure 23). The railroad company took the land Hannah P. Clark’s house was built on, forcing her to abandon or move the house. Understandably, according to her family, Hannah P. Clark was not happy about the taking of her land and home (Charles Clark personal communication 2012).

Hannah P. Clark chose to move the house rather than abandon it. Walter Clark, Hannah’s grandson, told his nephew Charles that it took two days to move the house which was hooked up to horses and a winch (Charles Clark personal communication 2012). The house was put on logs and was rolled down Ox Road where it had to be left overnight (Mary Kenney and Lois Swoboda personal communication 2012). Lanterns were hung on the house to warn approaching travelers on the road. Hannah Clark and some of her grandchildren spent the night in the house on the road (Charles Clark personal communication 2012). The house was moved across the road to its current location on the southwest corner of her larger parcel of land that once had been her father’s farm (Figure 29). The location change of the house is apparent in local maps from 1912 and 1915 (Figures 24 and 25). Figure 25 also illustrates both the old and new railroad bridge. Near the first location of the house the railroad constructed a three-sided shelter for the Colchester railroad station (Charles Clark personal communication 2012; The Sunday Star, 1 August 1920:83).

The move of the house on logs must have taken a toll on the structure, likely requiring some repairs. Once more the house was set with the front porch facing the railroad, although this time at a greater distance from the tracks. A brick pier foundation and a one room cellar with concrete walls were constructed on the new site. It appears only one of the chimney stacks was reconstructed at the new site. There is a chimney stack ghost in the floors and roof of the Period II section of the house. It is possible the move prompted changes to the kitchen addition. The kitchen roof framing was reconstructed with new circular-sawn lumber from Miller Manufacturing, a Richmond, Virginia Company founded in 1909 (Mattison 1972:19). The roof framing retains the original shipping label (Figure 26). It was delivered by rail to the Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac Railroad (R.F.&P.R.R.) foreman at Occoquan, Virginia. During the late 1910s Hannah Clark’s grandson, James Henry Clark, and his family lived with her on the farm. In 1918 James and Maude Clark’s son, William Russell Clark, was born in the house.

They lived with Hannah Clark for a few years since she had recently had a stroke and had difficulty speaking. Around 1922 James Clark and his family moved to the Weston place on Old Colchester Road and then a few years later built a Sears house farther up the road.

According to William Clarke’s remembrances, in the 1920s the only houses along Old Colchester Road were the Beach’s, the Metzger’s, the Hyde’s, Hannah Clark’s, Charles Clark’s, Frank Clark’s, the Weston’s place, Cleve English’s, the Minnicks’, Mr. Shick’s, James and Maude Clarke’s (his parents), and John Lee’s (Clarke 2003:1-2; Figure 28).

In 1925, Hannah Beach Potter Clark passed away in Colchester, Virginia. Hannah Clark was buried across the Occoquan River in the Dabney Community Cemetery in Woodbridge, Virginia. Hannah Clark’s headstone is a simple stone with segmental arch top and chamfered corners. It reads “HANNAH P. CLARK / FEB. 10, 1845 / FEB. 11, 1925 / Blessed sleep.” The cemetery is located just east of the same rail line that ran next to her house. Also buried in the cemetery is her brother Joseph Potter (b. 1852 - d. 1929) and her daughter Sallie E. Smith (b. 1874 - d. 1959). Hannah P. Clark was the only woman in her community who was divorced and she was later described by her family as a woman who knew her own mind (Joan Peed personal communication 2012).

Railroad Years, 1925 - 1956:
In Hannah P. Clark’s will, she appointed her youngest son, Samuel T. Clark, as her executor, and left him the majority of her estate (FFXCO WB 10:448). Her two older sons were to split a seven acre parcel located between their lands and their neighbor to the east. Her daughter Sallie E. Smith received $100. According to surviving family, there was concern about the division of the estate that so clearly favored her son Samuel. The brothers did not settle the division of the seven acres until the 1980s; family members felt that $100 showed little recognition for the care that Sallie gave her mother during the last years of her life (Charles Clark and Joan Peed personal communication 2012).

In addition to Hannah’s personal property, Samuel inherited 41 acres of the farm, including the residue of the 2.33 acre parcel, all of her land north of the railroad, and approximately 13 acres surrounding the house and out-buildings (FXCO WB 10:448; FXCO LTR 1926 Samuel T. Clark). By the time of Hannah’s death, Samuel had worked his way up through the ranks of the railroad industry, and he was the head station master of Union Station in downtown Washington, D.C. (Charles Clark personal communication 2012; Clarke 2003:6). It is unknown how Samuel used his inherited property and the house from 1925 to 1931. It is possible that he let relatives live in the house or that he rented the house to the railroad company as housing for the R.F.&P.R.R. section foreman or line master for the Colchester area. William Clarke, Hannah Clark’s great-grandson, wrote that his aunt, Estella Clark Crismond (Aunt Stella), lived in Hannah Clark’s house with her husband before moving to the old McElroy store (Clarke 2003:5). The Crismonds most likely lived in the house during the late 1920s, after Hannah Clark passed away in 1925 but before the 1930 U.S. Federal Population Census.

In 1931, Samuel sold the 13.35 acres surrounding the house and outbuildings to the R.F.&P.R.R. (FXCO DB Y10:53; Figure 30). Neighbors remember that during the 1930s and early 1940s, Bennie Purks and his family lived in the house (Mary Kenney and Lois Swoboda personal communication 2012). Mr. Purks worked as the section foreman for the R.F.&P.R.R. in the Colchester vicinity. As part of his responsibilities, he would walk the rail line every day to inspect for damage or obstructions. In 1943, as he was walking the rails in front of Charles Clark’s house, he was struck and killed by a north-bound train (Charles Clark personal communication 2012; The Washington Post [TWP], 10 January 1943:12).

During this period the railroad company made no substantial changes to the house itself. The wood-frame shed to the east of the house was constructed by the R.F.&P.R.R. for use by the section foreman and became known as the railroad toolshed (Charles Clark personal communication 2012). The toolshed’s board and batten siding and exposed rafter tails are typical of outbuildings from the 1920s and ‘30s. The other outbuildings illustrated on the 1931 survey include an outhouse, chicken coop/shed, and a garage.

After Mr. Purks’ death in 1943, Charles T. Clark was promoted by the railroad to be the section foreman for the Colchester vicinity. Charles T. Clark was the son of Charles A. Clark and the grandson of Hannah P. Clark. Charles T. grew up in his father’s house by the railroad. By 1920, when he was only 19 years old, Charles worked as a laborer for the R.F.&P.R.R. In 1943, Charles T. Clark, wife Annie, and daughter Joan moved into Hannah P. Clark’s house. They lived there for a few years as renters, until 1946, when they purchased the family property back from R.F. & P.R.R., minus a 35-foot buffer adjacent to the railroad (FXCO DB 519:536; Figure 33). Joan Clark was five years old when they moved into the house and spent the majority of her youth in Colchester surrounded by Clark family relatives (Joan Peed personal communication 2012).

Not much had changed on the property since Hannah P. Clark’s death in 1925. Joan Clark Peed remembers that although the house had electricity when she was a child, there were no other modern conveniences (Joan Peed personal communication 2012). The house was only heated by a single wood stove in Room 101, Dining Room. There was no indoor plumbing; just a well-pump outside the kitchen, and an outhouse behind the storage/chicken shed. Mrs. Peed remembers that very few changes were made to the house while they lived there except for maintenance and repainting the exterior. She also remembers that the interior chimney stack for the wood stove would catch fire about once a year, and her father would have to climb up onto the roof to clear it out.

While Charles T. Clark’s family lived in the house, the front doors on the north porch were rarely used. Instead, everyone came in through the back kitchen door. In addition to his railroad duties, Charles raised chickens and kept a large garden that grew mainly root vegetables and fruit. The root cellar beneath the house stored the vegetables and canned goods. The root vegetables were stored in bins elevated up on legs off of the dirt floor. Mrs. Peed recollects that their primary crop was sweet potatoes. She believes that her family used the house much as her great-grandmother Hannah did. Room 100 (Period II first floor) was used as a sitting room, and Room 101 (Period I first floor) as a formal dining room that was rarely used. The kitchen was the center of activity for the Clark family (Joan Peed personal communication 2012).

During the mid-twentieth century, Fairfax County and the Colchester vicinity land use patterns were changing. The family farms of the nineteenth century were being subdivided for single family homes and tract housing developments. In 1947, Charles T. and Anna Clark sold approximately one acre at the corner of their property to his brother and sister-in-law, Ralph and Mary Zenora Clark (FXCO DB 583:53). A few years later, in 1955, they subdivided another parcel for his other brother, Carlton Clark (FXCO DB 1285:311). This continued the presence of multiple Clark households on Hannah’s land (Figure 34). Mary Zenora Clark eventually built a small frame building in front of their house and ran a local store for many years. Her son, Hannah P. Clark’s great-grandson, continued to live in Colchester for 71 years before moving out of the area (Charles Clark personal communication 2012).

After Charles T. Clark was promoted to be station master at the Lorton station the family continued to live on the property (Figure 35). When, in the mid-1950s, Charles was promoted again to be station master at the Woodbridge station, the family decided to move into a modern brick ranch house on the other side of the Occoquan River in Prince William County (Joan Peed personal communication 2012). In 1956, Charles and Anna Clark sold the remainder of the land they had purchased from the railroad, approximately ten acres including the house and outbuildings, to the Harbor Bay Corporation (FXCO DB 1429:320).

Rental Property, 1956 - 1983:
The Harbor Bay Corporation was the developer of the Harbor View subdivision located northeast of Colchester (FXCO BZA, 11 September 1956:201). Harbor View is located northeast of the Clark house on land that was the Allison half of the Potter-Allison land division of 1849 (FXCO DB R3:147). The principal owner of Harbor Bay Corporation was Andrew W. Clarke, an Alexandria lawyer and former state senator who had for years been active in Fairfax County real estate development.32 Prior to his death in 1968, he was excused from standing trial for federal and state indictments regarding bribery for rezoning, along with many other Fairfax County supervisors, planners, and developers (TWP, 1 April 1968:B6).

The next record of land ownership for this parcel and house was in 1969, when Margaret Clarke, widow of Andrew Clarke, and the First Virginia Bank sold the property to Timberlake S. McCue (FXCO DB 3260:360). Timberlake McCue was a real estate developer in Northern Virginia and was purchasing property in Colchester for a marina and potential housing subdivision. The majority of the land for this envisioned Colchester development was the southern half of James Potter’s farm, on land adjacent to Andrew Clarke’s Harbor View subdivision.

From 1956 to 1983, no development occurred on the parcel surrounding the Hannah P. Clark house. The marina was constructed but the housing subdivision never materialized beyond a few houses along Old Colchester Road. In 1975, McCue subdivided the property by creating a 1.4507 acre parcel around the house (FXCO DB 4223:38). In 1980, the heirs of Timberlake McCue conveyed the Colchester land holdings of 134.88 acres, divided into 6 parcels, to the McCue Limited Partnership (FXCO DB 5512:1952). The only known activity on this parcel during this period was using the house as a rental property.

During the 1960s Doris Dodson rented the house and lived there with her children. Neighbors remember that during the 1970s there were many different residents of the house. None of them stayed very long or became involved in Colchester community life. Neighbor Mary Kenney remembered babysitting in 1972/73 for a family of two women and a little girl that lived in the house for a few years during the early 1970s (Mary Kenney and Lois Swoboda personal communication 2012). Although unconfirmed by current neighbors, a later owner of the property had been told that during the late 1970s the house was rented to a group of Flower Children that used the property as a drug distribution center (Enyedi, c.2011:2).

A number of physical changes were made to the house between 1956 and 1983. There is no known written documentation about when these changes occurred. However, it is likely, that based on the lack of modern conveniences when the house was sold in 1956, and the types of building materials used in the changes, that the house was modernized soon after Harbor Bay purchased the property in 1956 to make it a viable rental property. Porches were enclosed, building systems were installed, doors were modified, and much of the nineteenth-century molding was removed (Figures 36-39).

The most significant of the alterations to the house was the modernization of the building systems. A new well was dug and plumbing was brought inside the house for the first time. A septic system and two bathrooms were built, one on the former front porch and one in the corner of a bedroom. A central heating and air conditioning system was installed along with ductwork throughout the house. Concrete steps and floor were poured in the cellar. A new kitchen was installed including a full appliance suite, sink, and built-in cabinetry. The front/north porch was enclosed and subdivided into rooms including one of the new bathrooms and the furnace room. The well pump porch off the kitchen was rebuilt larger and enclosed to house a washer and dryer (Joan Peed and Charles Clark personal communication 2012). Additional closets were added in the bedrooms and many of the doors were replaced with hollow core doors with brass plated hardware. This period is likely when the majority of the plaster on the walls was removed and replaced with drywall on top of the early lath. The outhouse, garage, and chicken shed were demolished.

The Enyedi’s Furnace Road Studio, 1986 - 2011:
In 1983 the McCue and McCue Limited Partnership sold the 1.45 acre parcel and house to Thomas and Patricia Lewis (FXCO DB 5826:593). The Lewis’ only lived in Colchester a short time and made no significant alterations to the house (Thomas Lewis, personal communication 2012). Thomas Lewis is a historian and published author, including books on the Civil War and George Washington (www.thomasalewis.com). In 1986 the Lewis' sold the property to Janos (Jonathan) and Diana Enyedi (FXCO DB 6545:1978).

Janos Enyedi was an industrial artist in Washington, D.C. (www.furnaceroadstudio.com). He was a sculptor, photographer and mixed media artist who focused on America’s twentieth-century industrial landscape. Enyedi grew from a regional to international artist with work exhibited in museums, embassies, and corporate collections around the world. As his success as an artist grew, his need for larger studio space increased. Almost immediately after purchasing the property in Colchester, the Enyedi’s began construction on a new studio on the property. The Enyedi’s named the studio Furnace Road Studio after the road to which the house fronts. They broke ground on the studio towards the end of 1986. The hired Harry Braswell as the contractor to construct a steel building kit on top of a poured concrete slab. The interior work was finished during the spring of 1987. Around 1990 they added a small wood addition on the east elevation to provide additional storage space (Diana Enyedi, personal communication 2012).

During their nearly 25-year ownership the Enyedi’s cared for the property and made only a few significant alterations to the house. Sometime during the 1980s the south porch was enclosed with full height windows and french doors, creating a sunroom (Sallie Lyons, personal communication 2012; Figure 42). In 1993, the Enyedi’s replaced the east wall of Room 101. Before 1993 there had been a single two-over-two double-hung window on the north side of the east wall. The Enyedi’s removed the drywall and discovered the original lath over the vertical log framing. The window and possible ghost of the Period I stair is visible in Figure 43 which was taken mid-demolition. The wood floating floor in the kitchen was installed around 2000. Also in 2000 they had the gutters, downspouts, and roof replaced with new plywood sheathing, roofing paper, and asphalt shingles. The flat roof above the kitchen also received a moisture barrier. In 2005 they upgraded the electrical in Room 100 which they used as their office and installed dedicated lines for their computers.

A wood shed was constructed behind the studio circa 1992 to house yard equipment that had been stored in the studio. During the mid-1990s the Enyedi’s constructed a large wood deck on the east side of the house. During the late 1990s the Enyedi’s built a slate patio in the woods southeast of their property.

During the Spring of 2011 the Enyedi’s sold their house and Furnace Road Studio to the Fairfax County Park Authority and moved to Florida. Mr. Enyedi passed along to the FCPA a manuscript of his recollections of the house’s history based on stories shared with him by neighbors and visitors. The Enyedi’s moved to a warehouse district of industrial artists in St. Petersburg. A few months after their move Janos Enyedi suffered a heart attack and then died of complications on Oct. 6, 2011 (www.furnaceroadstudio.com/newsupdates.html).

Old Colchester Park & Preserve:
During 2006/2007 the Fairfax County Park Authority (FCPA) purchased 135.7 acres from The McCue and McCue Limited Partnership (FXCO DB 18297:57, FXCO DB 19206:2018). These purchases included much of the nineteenth-century Potter family property of Colchester Farm and some of the Potter’s historic Colchester town lots. This large land acquisition was for the creation of the Old Colchester Park & Preserve. One of the parcels purchased was the 9.4 acre parcel (FXCO Tax Map #1133 01 0019) located to the east of the Hannah P. Clark house (FXCO Tax Map # 113-3-001-0019). This parcel includes the wood railroad toolshed behind the house. The FCPA purchased the Enyedi parcel (FXCO Tax Map # 1133 01 0019A) in 2011 to complete the acquisition of land northeast of the intersection of Furnace Road and Old Colchester Road (Figure 44).

During the spring of 2013 FCPA contracted out to Servpro for basic cleaning, mold remediation, and removal of carpeting. FCPA is currently conducting archaeological investigations on the park-owned land to study the prehistoric and historic occupation in the vicinity of Colchester.