Loading...
HRAB 12-15-92 Meeting AgendaL, COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 -]MEMORANDUM TO: Historic Resources Advisory Board FROM: Ron Lilley, Planner II W RE: Meeting Date and Agenda DATE: December 8, 1992 There will be a meeting of the Historic Resources Advisory Board on December 15th, at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room of the Old County Court House. Please let me know if you are unable to attend. AGENDA 1. Continued discussion of procedures and requirements for Rezonings and Master Development Plans affecting historic properties. 2. Continued discussion of design contest for Plaque Program. 3. Other, as necessary. Enclosures follow. 9 North Loudoun Street Winchester, VA 22601 P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22604 Enclosures The following items related to the agenda for the meeting and as follow up to our November meeting are enclosed. Please review these in preparation for our upcoming meeting: 1. A summary of the November meeting. 2. Staff notes on HRAB involvement with development affecting significant historic sites. 3. Staff findings related to plaque production 4. A copy of the portions of the 1992 Comprehensive Plan relating to historic resources (in addition to what was provided last month). 5. Informational copy of an article from the Fall '92 issue of VDHR's "Notes on Virginia" relating to property values and historic designation. 6. Informational copy of 'Economics and the Property Rights Argument" article from the Fall '92 issue of the Preservation Alliance of Virginia newsletter. Summary of 11/17/92 Meeting Attendance Members: Ray Ewing Judith Swiger Lee Taylor Gary VanMeter John Venskoske Staff: Ron Lilley Agenda items: 1. Proposed procedural changes for developments affecting historic resources. The matters of routine HRAB review of development affecting significant historic sites and listing the especially significant sites in the Comprehensive Plan were discussed. Members were supportive of being a regular review agency. Staff noted that an ordinance change would not be required to institute that, but that the necessary steps would be pursued by the staff. Approaches to establishing a list of especially significant historic properties were discussed in light of the Nov. 4 Planning Commission input on the issue. The thought of listing only those properties whose owners would not object to being listed was reconsidered when it was pointed out that such a voluntary scheme would probably not achieve much additional protection. Members decided that writing to the property owners to determine what level of objection there would be to such a list would help everyone know how to handle the issue. Staff was asked to draft a letter along those lines, with a positive tone about historic values, which members could review at the December meeting. It was agreed to try to get Maral Kalbian to present her recommended list of especially significant sites at the December meeting. 2. Plaque Program design contest The findings about the 'Equestrian Forge" company were well-received. Staff was asked to check with that company about the limitations on the level of intracasy a design could have, for purposes of informing design contestants. The following design parameters were agreed upon: - the size should be between 50 and 80 square inches - the wording should be "Frederick County Historic Site" There was general consensus that the contest should be limited to Frederick County school system students based on the expectation that there would be a good number of good quality entries. It was also generally agreed that the HRAB should pass along their top five choices to the Board of Supervisors for final judgement. There would be first, second, and third place prizes of $100, $50, and $25, respectively, as long as the Board of Supervisors approved that money coming from the County's "Historical Marker" reserve fund. The possibility of an additional award for the final design producer, such as a smaller -scale version of the plaque mounted on a small marble block, was well-received. Staff was asked to look into that possibility further. Staff was asked to draft an information sheet about the contest for review at the December meeting. 3. Legislative Contact for Virginia Preservation Alliance. Staff was assigned as the contact point for this. 4. Other a. Using Maral Kalbian for technical expertise on a contract basis was considered worth pursuing. Given the funding limitations and expected work load, it was generally agreed that contracting for 50 hours of assistance for a 12 month period should provide a reasonable level of assistance. Staff was asked to follow that up with the Planning Department Director. b. Staff presented some findings about the EDC's involvement with promotion of historic resources for tourism/economic development purposes. It was agreed that having EDC Director June Wilmot at a meeting to explain their involvement more completely would be helpful. c. Bettye Chumley's resignation letter was announced and suggestions about possible replacements for her at -large seat were solicited. d. Ray Ewing noted that it would be helpful to have a copy of changes to the Comprehensive Plan since 1989 relating to historic resources. Staff agreed to provide that. Notes on HRAB Involvement with Development Affecting Historic Resources Staff is pursuing adding the HRAB to the list of review agencies for development proposals affecting significant historic resources. fl! keen 11 11 nnctnrl „1, +h D- --- Y 70• YvOwu vu Leat. I discussed the options the HRAB has considered for listing especially significant properties with Planning Director Bob Watkins and Deputy Director Kris Tierney. They emphasized the need to proceed cautiously in terms of publishing such a list or even referring to particular properties in the study, based on the common perception that being so recognized can adversely affect property values. The following moves were recommended: - Develop ways to use the Rural Landmarks Survey that would not be controversial. This might include making reference to the full report in the Comp Plan, saying that the full report would be considered in review of development proposals. - Hold off on sending the "feeler" letter to owners of especially significant properties until more is settled about the whole approach to historic preservation. For instance, if the County adopts an approach which includes density bonus provisions for keeping historic portions undisturbed, that could be stated in a letter to property owners to help assure them that their property value would not be diminished. Another possibility is to include a provision for tax breaks for restoration of historic properties. The HRAB could develop proposals for a well -coordinated approach to historic preservation. - Develop an education program about historic resources that includes information about the positive effects of historic designation. - Coordinate with the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors on all these matters, as an advisory body to them. Therefore, I am not including the draft letter to property owners in this package. Maral is planning on presenting a brief summary of her Landmarks Survey work at our meeting on the 15th. That will allow HRAB members to be brought up to date on the study and to get a good understanding of what properties are considered especially significant and why. It should also be helpful for beginning a discussion of education efforts. Findings on Plaque Production I discussed plaque production and design parameters with Alex Bigler of Equestrian Forge at some length. He offered some good advice about our contest. In terms of level of intracasy that can be reproduced in a 3-dimensional plaque, he explained that some fairly complex art can be reproduced successfully, but that it should be done as line drawings, with line thicknesses of at least 1/16". Shading is discouraged as very difficult to reproduce. He said that it is difficult to spell out all of the parameters to consider in adapting a 2-dimensional drawing to a 3-dimensional product and that it is easier for them to adapt a design than it is to tell someone else what all to consider. He suggested that, rather than have a lot of effort preparing a presentation -quality design wasted, which is what happens to most of the entrants, the rules should be geared toward conceptual sketches. This would also facilitate getting the best concepts, whereas a contest with more finalized designs might keep those who might have very good conceptual skills but not as strong implementation skills from submitting a design. Those who wanted to could develop their design to a more finished level, but the judges would need to evaluate entries based on the concept. After concepts were evaluated, there would be a couple of options: a. have the favorite concept brought to Equestrian Forge for their adaptation to the mould product; b. have the top few (maybe five) concepts and their producers get advice from Equestrian Forge about how to complete their design in a reproducible way, then have them complete their design for final judging. He said that changes in wording, such as changing "Site" to "Building" or "Structure", would not be difficult or add much to the cost of producing a different plaque if that were ever necessary. On the option of producing small versions of the plaque (to use as presents for financial contributors or as part of the design contest first prize, for instance), Mr. Bigler said that it would probably cost from $50 - $200 to translate the design to a smaller mould, then about $15 for a medallion -sized product (or less than $10 in pewter). Other options include selling small versions for fund-raising. Another option for a design contest prize is to award the first plaque produced to the winning designer. Some things to think about... I'll get a draft information sheet on the design contest together for the Board's review at our meeting. N Notes from the Jireetor P reservation pays. But does it really? Over the past year, many have con- tended thathistoric preservation impedes on-tendedthathistoricpreservationimpedes growth and development and hence, economic well-being. Many have stated that property values plummet when a resource is tagged "historic." But, is that argument valid? Let's look at the hard facts and figures — aside from the aesthetic and societal benefits that accrue from preserving the historic re- sources of a community. The Government Fi- nance Officers Association, in a ground -break- ing study ofthe economic benefits that flow from designation of urban historic districts, chose Fredericksburg, Virginia, as one of its two study areas. The figures for Fredericksburg are star- tling. In the period 1971-1990, residential prop- erty values within the Fredericksburg Historic District rose an average of 674 percent com- pared to an increase of only 410 percent for properties outside of the district. Commercial property values shot up 480 percent compared with 280 percent for improved lots outside the district's boundaries. One needs to look as well at the concrete measurable benefits that go far beyond real estate values. The Finance Officers' study has isolated figures that derive solely from heritage tourism in the area. Keep in mind that heritage development can flourish only when there are bona -fide authentic historic resources to pro- mote. The American traveller is becoming in- creasingly sophisticated and is often unwilling to spend money to visit less authentic historic sites. In 1989 alone, tourists to the Fredericksburg area purchased $11.7 million worth of items from businesses in the historic district; the $17.4 million spent by tourists out- side the district were mostly for motel, restau- rant and gasoline sales along Interstate 95. According to William M. Beck, president of the Fredericksburg Downtown Retail Market- ing, Inc., ..... the historic designation of our down- town was the first step in revitalizing the region's major business district." In 1971, many people would not have recognized the potential of the buildings described in the historic district desig- nation. Today those facts are self-evident. Examination of the Virginia Main Street pro- gram reveals other remarkable figures to sub- stantiate the dollars and cents of preservation. In the seven years of Virginia's participation in the National Main Street program, there has been a net gain of 629 businesses in the 14 Main Street communities; 1,234 new jobs have been created; over $35 million in private sector invest- ment has been recorded. One of the most dramatic figures is for Bedford, where a historic district was formally listed on the Virginia and [National registers in 1984;179 building improve - 3 WT V 1 - MIST .kFRIi:ANS IN ENGLISH AMERICA Governor L. Douglas Wilder unveils historic marker commemo- rating the first African Americans at Jamestown. The Harriet Tubman Historical Society sponsored the marker as part of its effort to gain recognition for Africans Americans in American history. ment projects have occurred in a community of only 6,000 since 1985. All but three of the 14 Main Street communities have historic districts listed on the Virginia and National registers. Those districts have served as critical elements in their revitalization efforts by using familiar buildings and features to identify the past vi- brancy of main street. This summer, five new jurisdictions have been named "Main Street" communities — Berryville, Bristol, Elkton, Or- ange and Clifton Forge — all of which already have designated historic districts or have poten- tially eligible districts. Aparticularly controversial area of landmark designation has been that of Civil War battle- fields. Some people have held that simply desig- nating a Civil War battlefield — a non -regulatory action — substantially erodes the marketability of the affected land. Figures from a study of the economic benefit of establishing a system for protecting Civil War areas in Virginia's Shenandoah Valley, conducted by Virginia Poly- technic Institute and State University, are very revealing. To quote from the study, these fig- ures reflect the direct benefit of establishing Civil War battlefield parks and do not accountfor secondary and tertiary effects. The figures mea- sure the benefit of increased visitation — what tourists spena and the local services that develop to accommodate those visitors — even if the National Park Service's involvement is minimal. For example, for the area of the Third Battle of Winchester, with continued private ownership of the battlefield and minimum improvements, visitation would generate $1.4 million to the local Winchester/Frederick County economy. With maximum visitation, the benefit to the local economy would, amount to $2 million annually. We need to find ways that farmers and other land owners can harvest history and scenery in the Valley as a sustainable crop. The Department has embarked on an inno- vative program with the Virginia Division of Tourism to promote visitation to Virginia's his- toric districts in towns, villages and neighbor- hoods. Forthe firsttime, NationalTourism Week and National Historic Preservation Week will be linked in 1993 in a celebration known as Virginia HeritageTourismWeeks. Communitiesthathave succeeded in preserving their historic landscape and architectural fabric —both the big -name landmark attractions and the engaging historic districts — have the potential to derive real measurable economic benefits from presenting those resources. Visitation by tourists and pa- tronage by residents increase the economic and social vitality of communities. And, formal recognition by listing on the Virginia Landmarks Register is, as Mr. Beck said, the first step. Knowledge of a community's resources can lead to appreciation and, with imagination and vision, to seeing a community's shared heritage as a marketable asset. Virginia's priceless collection of historic places — from fishing villages on the Eastern Shore to indus- trial towns of the far Southwest — is arguably one of its greatest gifts. The Department is focusing its work on education and definition so that all of Virginia's historic communities can profit from that knowledge. In 1989 atone, tourists to the Fredericksburg area purchased $11.7 million worth of items from businesses in the historic district. Notes on Virginia is funded in part by a grant from the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the U. S. Dept. of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin or handicap in its federally assisted programs. Ifyou believe you have been discriminated against in any program or activity or facility described above, or if you desire further information, please write to: Office for Equal Opportunity, U. S. Dept. of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240. The contents and opinions of this publication do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of the Interior, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation by the Dept. of the Interior. The Department of Historic Resources, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, will make this publication available in braille, large print or audio tape, upon request. Please allow 2-4 weeks for delivery. Ell aconoics and ttie Property Rights, I OrcrUM�n�. �■�—�d��IAg6 By Donovan D. Rypkema Editor's Note. This article summary of a presentation made Mr. Rypkema, principal for the Estate Services Group, a real e and economic development con ing firm headquartered in Wash ton, D.C., in May of 1992. The burgeoning "private property rights" movement is frequently using and abusing an economic argument in its attack on land use regulation. In simplified terms the argument is as follows: "This land use regulation (or his- toric preservation regulation) diminishes the economic value of my asset. I am entitled to use (develop) my asset to its `highest and best use'. It is wrong for the government to deprive me of that opportunity." It is time to set the record straight. The Unique Characteristics of Land as an Economic Asset Land is an asset like no other. Every parcel is unique, it is fixed in place, it is finite in quantity, and it will last longer than any of its possessors. In part because of its peculiar attributes, real estate has always been treated differently than any other asset in law, taxation, lending, politi- cal perspective, and philosophy. But real estate has been treated differently for two fundamental economic reasons as well: • the impact of land use on surrounding prop- erty values, and • the primary source of value of real estate being largely external to the property bound- aries. The investment decisions of two next door neighbors have absolutely no measurable effect on the assets of the otherparty when considering such items as stocks or gold coins. However, when the asset is real estate every decision one owner makes has an immediate impact on the economic value of the asset of the other. Historically, the initial purpose of land use regulation was public health and safety. Though it is conveniently forgotten by the pro- ponents of "property rights," the miti- is u gation of adverse economic impacts is by also at the core of land use limitations. Real The common sense approach for state real estate investment protection has suit- been land use regulations instituted by ing- the public to protect the composite economic value. Those who loudly proclaim, "Its my land and you can't tell me what to do with it," are quick to appear before City Council when a homeless shelter is moving in next door or a hazardous waste disposal site is proposed next to their summer cottage. And their argu- ment won't be, "I'm against the homeless" or "Hazardous waste shouldn't be disposed of," but rather "That action will have an adverse effect on my property value and you, City Coun- cil members, need to prevent that." Land Use Regulations Protect Property Values Where does real estate value originate? Some land owners would have you believe that the value of their asset somehow emerges from 4 within the boundaries of their site and there- fore they are entitled to the highest return available. Nothing could be further from the truth. Consider two five -acre parcels of desert land—one in the middle of the Sahara and the other in the middle of Las Vegas. Within the lot lines, both have the same physical charac- teristics. Do they have the same economic value? Obviously not. But the differences be- tween the two lie entirely outside the bound- aries of the property. It is not the land, but the activity around the land, that gives considerable value to one parcel and next to none to the other. Forces of Value Forces which push the economic value of a single parcel of real estate up or down are: social, economic, physical, and political. Land use regulations reflect the political and, to a lesser extent, the social forces of value. Does the enactment of a land use regulation affect value? Absolutely. In both directions! The rezoning of a parcel of land from General Agriculture to Light Industrial will change the economic value of the property. That land use decision increased the value of the site. Note that the land itself did not change. The permit- ted land use changed and, therefore, the eco- nomic value of the property changed. When was the last time you heard a property owner say, "Because of rezoning, my land went from being worth $10,000 to being worth $100,000. But since it was the action of the Planning Commission and not some invest- ment I made that increased the value, I'm writing a check to the City for $90,000."? No landowner has ever said that nor should he/she have. The political force of value is one of the risks inherent in the ownership of real estate and it has it upside opportunity as well as downside potential. To suggest that a decline in value resulting from the enactment of a public land use limi- tation entitles a property owner to "just com- pensation" is to ask for a floor under the risk of real estate ownership. Where then is the offset- ting ceiling limiting the enhanced value gener- ated from the same source? No property rights pamphlet has advocated that equitable ex- change. Governmental Decisions and Property Values Does the enactment of a historic preserva- tion statute or a wetlands protection law ever reduce the value of an individual piece of real estate? Certainly. But every day hundreds of governmental decisions affect individual in- vestments of all kinds, and often adversely. What happens to the value of Lockheed Cor- poration bonds when McDonnell Douglas is 1� Land use controls are a capitalist plot to optimize property values of the majority of real estate owners The economics of preservation will be studied at the Alliances Virginia Preservation Conference, scheduled for April I5-17, 1993 in Danville. This home ispartof the ciry'sfamous "MillionairesRow. "Forconference information, call theAlliance office at (703) 886-4362. isen instead to build a new bomber? It goes down! What happens to the value of the local Ford dealer's franchise when the City decides to buy Chevrolets? It goes down! What happens to the value of the utility company stock when the state utilities commission refuses to grant a rate increase? It goes down! In every instance a political decision by a public body acting in whatit deemed "thepublic interest" had an effect on somebody's assets. Real estate owners have no inherent right not to be adversely affected by political decisions. This does not mean that it is not possible to have a land use decision that is fundamentally unfair. Of course that can happen, and when it does it is incumbent on the property owner to demonstrate to the decision making body that what he/she loses as a result of those restrictions is much greater than what the public has to gain. But to object solely because of a claim of potential loss of value demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of the nature of real estate. Property Owners vs. the Government Usually in the heat of land use arguments the "property rights" advocates frame the debate in terms of property owners versus the "govern- ment". Defining the dispute in that context con - j ures up visions of faceless bureaucrats in Wash- ington dictating how far a garage has to be set back from Elm Street and deciding what color one's house can be painted. But the leaders of the property rights movement know full well that it is a bogus argument. Virtually all land use controls are enacted and implemented at the local level. It is not Washington (or Richmond) bureaucrats, but citizens from the town or the county who Even the National Register of Historic Places, one of the few pieces of federal legislation affecting properties at all, places absolutely no restriction whatsoever on what a property owner may do with hislher property. The owner, in fact, is even com- pletely free to demolish the historic struc- ture. This argument is a blatantmisrepresenta- tion in another sense: it is not for the sake of the local government that land use restric- tions are put into place, but rather to protect the value of the investment of one property ownerfrom the adverse economic impact of the actions of another. Fairness and Equity The "property rights" debate is about fairness, about equity. It is about the fair- ness of allowing a single property owner to adversely affect the values of a multitude of owners. It is about the fairness of the public getting a return on their investment which created much "of the individual value to begin with. It is about the fairness of one owner's windfall against a group of own- ers' maintenance of value. It is about the fairness of a single indi- vidual destroying the "product differentia- tion" of a community, built up over genera- tions, in order to create a xerox copy locally of somewhere else. It is about the fairness of the owner of real estate demanding com- pensation if his/her asset declines in value because of a public policy decision when the holder of the Lockheed bond, the Ford dealer, and the owner of utility company stock have no such protection. In fact, land use con- • trols are a capitalistplot to optimize property values of the majority of real estate owners, not a com mun ist conspiracy k to deprive individuals of some imaginary "prop- erty rights." Adam Smith, the fa- ther of laissez faire eco- nomics, perceptively observed that, "As soon as the land of any coun- try has all become pri- vate property, the land- lords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed." That doesn't mean we are de- priving them of rights when we tell them no. 2 N IOTNOTEAS F.Virginia Department of Historic Resources 221 Governor Street •Richmond, Virginia 23219 • (804) 786-3143 No. 16 November, 1992 Presentation Held for First People Ceremonial dancing in Capitol Square and a blessing of the book by Chief Webster Custalow of the Mattaponi Tribe highlighted the presentation of the Department's newest publication, First People: the Early Indians of Virginia. Hugh Miller, De- partment Director, presented the book to Oliver Perry of the Nansemond Tribe and Chief Custalow who in turn made the official presentation to Secre- tary of Natural Resources, Elizabeth Haskell. A reception followed at the Department where objects featured in the book were displayed and food prepared by the United Indians of Virginia was served. First People will be available for purchase from museum book shops and retail stores throughout the state. The sale price is $11.95. As part of its educational outreach program, the Department is providing a free copy to the libraries of all elementary and middle schools in Virginia. Development of Regulations Underway The Board of Historic Resources and the Depart- ment have begun the process of promulgating permanent regulations setting out the criteria and administrative procedures for designating historic landmarks. Interested persons have until December 31 to submit preliminary written comments for the Department's consideration in preparing draft regulations. A public meeting to receive comments will also be held on December 16 at 2:00 p.m. in Senate Room A, General Assembly Building, Richmond. Following this preliminary period, the Department will prepare draft regulations for public comment. For more information, contact Margaret T. Peters at the Department. Calendar - December 8: State Review Board, Senate Room A, General Assembly Building, Richmond, 10 a.m. December 9: Board of Historic Resources, Senate Room A, General Assembly Rililding, Richmond, 10 a.m. December 16: Public Meeting to receive comments for proposed regulations for the Department and the Board of Historic Resources, Senate Room A, Virginia General Assembly Building, 2 p.m. FOOTNOTES is ftnded in part by a grant from the National Park Service, U. S. Dept. of the Interior. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the U. S. Dept. of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, rational origin or handicap in its federally assisted programs.If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program or activity or facility described above, or if you desire further information, please write to: Office for Equal Opportunity, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Washington, D.C.20240.The contents and opinions of this publication do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Dept. of the Interior, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsers tnt or reconmienidation. by the Dept. of the Interior. The Dept. of Historic Resources, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, will make this publication available in braille, large print or audio tape upon request. Please allow 2.4 weeks for delivery. President Signs Preservation Law Amend- ments President Bush has signed the National Historic Preservation Amendments of 1992, more popularly known as the "Fowler Bill" after Senator Wyche Fowler, Jr. [D -Ga.], the bill's principal sponsor in the Senate. The law is the first significant change to the National Preservation Act since 1980. The new law does several things to reinforce historic preservation activity. The legislation authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to delegate greater responsibilities to the State Historic Preser- vation Offices. The law includes provisions that strengthen the requirements of Section 106, the federal review process for considering adverse impacts of federal projects on historic resources. For example, it includes a new provision that penalizes the intentional demolition of historic properties to avoid review prior to federal involve- ment. Other enhancements to the federal preserva- tion program in the new law include the establish- ment of a National Center for Preservation Technol- ogy and Training and a new historic preservation education and training program within the National Park Service. The law also clarifies that preserva- tion grant funds may be used to help preserve National Register -listed religious properties so long as that aid is secular and does not promote religion. Enactment of the amendments culminates several years of negotiation and work by the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers and numerous other preservarion groups. Details on various elements of the new law are available from the Department of Historic Resources. [Infor- mation from the Preservation Law Reporter, No- vember 9, 1992.1 Newsome mouse in Newport News Re- ceives Presidential Award The project to rehabilitate the Newsome House in Newport News as a house museum and community center will receive a special i'residenaw 41'reserva- tion Award. According to John Quarstein, Museum Director for the City of Newport News, the award culminates a long project that began with the listing of the Newsome House on the Virginia Landmarks Register in 1989 and the National Register of Historic Places in 1990. The renovated residence of Joseph Thomas Newsome, a leading black attor- ney and newspaper man in Newport News, is al- ready welcoming visitors from around the state. Delegate Henry Maxwell of Newport News will receive the award on December 4 during special ceremonies in Washington. Virgii�n__ia Department 4 " istorlc Resources 221 Governor Street -Richmond, Virginia 23219 -) C, 6 , r� T _'-1, a 1 V u Fredericksburg Hosts October Board Meetings The Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center was the site for the October meeting of the Virginia Board of Historic Resources and the State Review Board. At the invitation of State Review Board member Tony Wrenn, the two boards and members of the Department staff travelled to Fredericksburg to learn about the extensive range of preservation activities going on in the Fredericks- burg area. During the business session of the meeting, the Historic Resources Board listed four new properties on the Virginia Landmarks Register: Greenwood in Orange County; Lantz Hall, a prominent building at the Massanutten Military Academy in Woodstock, Shenandoah County; the Lincoln Theatre in the Town of Marion; and Woodson's Mill in Nelson County. In a separate action, the State Review Hoard recommended that the newly registered Virginia landmarks be nominated to the National Register of Historic Places. Members of the two boards were enthusiastic about the special preservation work being done in the Fredericksburg area. Charles McDaniel, past president of the Historic Fredericksburg Founda- tion, spoke of the importance of preservation in Fredericksburg, saying that, in addition to improv- ing the quality of life in the community, preser- vation had led to measurable economic benefits. He made special note of the need to find a solution for preserving the Fredericksburg railroad station. Brown Morton reported on the thriving degree program in historic; preservation at Mary Washing- ton College. Cathy Baker of the Stafford County Planning Department described the survey of 300 historic sites in the county using a grant from the Department. Maria Burks, Superintendent of the Fredericksburg-Spotsylvania National Military Park, stressed that her organization was successfully identifying more points of mutual interest between the national historical parks and adjacent property owners; John Pierce spoke to the support for urban archaeology by the James Monroe Library. Anita Dodd of the Fredericksburg Area Chapter of the Archeological Society of Virginia and Jack Abbott of the Spotsylvania County Historical Commission also addressed the Boards about their respective programs relating to preservation. The Boards concluded their visit with a walking tour of downtown Fredericksburg led by Mr. Wrenn and a reception at his home. F- .��'! 1 1Qa0 BULK RATE U.S. POSTAGE PAID RICHMOND, VA. PERMIT NO. 1225 Virginia Archaeology Week 1992 - A_ Big Success Virginia Archaeology Week 1992 reached an estimated 10,000 people with 75 events, including lectures, exhibits and hands-on archaeological experiences throughout the state. This year the Department targeted schools and classroom teach- ers, sending out more than 1,200 resource packag- es. Plans are already underway for Virginia Archae- ology Week 1993 with a theme that will recognize the 250th birthday of Thomas Jefferson - the father of Virginia archaeology. Stay tuned for details in future issues of Footnotes. 1 __ 1.• sa n -- 7 ` 7Y-��hs�ville ai ar52i!��bv1 TTyrµ a.. ---un µr ays+ar A four-day field school at the 18th -century Hugh- lett's Tavern in Northumberland County and the resulting archaeological site management plan marked the inauguration of the Department's new Archaeological Site Stewardship program. Spon- sored by the Department, the Hughlett's Tavern Foundation, the Archeological Society of Virginia and the Northumberland Historical Society, the field school demonstrated sound archaeological practices and provided a valuable educational experience for the more than 40 people who participated in the excavations. The Department hopes that this effort will be the first of many such projects designed to encourage good stewardship of Virginia's archaeo- logical sites. News Briefs o Keith Egloff, Assistant Curator for the Department, received the Professional Arch- eologist of the Year Award from the Ar- cheological Society of Virginia. The award recognizes Keith's contributions to the field through both his scholarly publications and his commitment to educational programs. The Fairfax County Heritage Resources Branch of the Office of Comprehensive Planning received the Governor's Environ- mental Excellence award in the category of historic preservation. The National Park Service has published A Directory of Training Opportunities in Cul- tural Resources Management. The publi- cation identifies courses, seminars and classes offered by federal and state agencies and universities through the country. For information, call (202)343-9561. V iginta Preservation Update December 1, 1992 ALLIANCE ESTABLISHES LANDMARKS COUNCIL Over 175 individuals came togeth- er on November 20th at Lower Bremo Plantation in Fluvanna County for the first-ever meeting of National Register property own- ers in Virginia. As a result of the meeting, the Preservation Alliance has established a Landmarks Council membership level to en- courage future gatherings of own- ers of Virginia's historic properties. The Lower Bremo meeting was organized by the Preservation Al- liance to encourage interaction among the individuals and institu- tions that help maintain the historic legacy of the Commonwealth. This initial meeting was underwrit- ten with generous support by McLean Faulconer, Inc., Realtors, from Charlottesville. Additional underwriting support came from Erie Landmark Company of Chantilly, Virginia, and Hickory Chair of Hickory, North Carolina. Mr. and Mrs. David Wright, own- ers of Lower Bremo, were the gracious hosts for the evening. Addison "Tad" Thompson of Tuckahoe Plantation invited his fellow property owners to the meeting. Participants at the Lower Bremo session were treated to exterior tours of Upper Bremo and the uni- que stone barns, as well as exterior and interior tours of Lower Bremo. Neil W. Horstman, Executive Di- rector of Mount Vernon, was the featured speaker for the evening. Mr. Horstman's witty and informa- tive comments on the restoration work underway at Mount Vernon brought sympathetic responses from many in the crowd who had restored their own properties. He ended his comments with a strong statement of support for the Preser- vation Alliance, noting the need for an effective statewide voice for preservation. In response to the calls for addi- tional meetings of the group, the Alliance established the Landmarks Council membership category for those individuals who own individ- ually listed National Register prop- erties in Virginia. Property owners who contribute $100 or more will receive all basic membership bene- fits of Alliance membership, such as our newsletters, notice of con- ferences, and publications. As a special benefit, Landmarks Council members will also receive an in- vitation to an annual meeting of National Register property owners at one of Virginia's most historic sites. Council members are also invited to attend Legislative Up- date meetings during the General Assembly session. Individuals owning individually listed National Register property in Virginia who are interested in be- coming members of the Landmarks Council should contact the Alli- ance office at (703) 8864362. in upcoming months, the Alliance will be working with our member organizations to update the mailing list of property owners in Virginia in an attempt to identify all the current owners of these special properties. PRESERVATION LLL4NCE 0 O F V I R G I N I A Vol. 5, No. 8 NEW TECHNIQUES TO SAVE THE OLD Loan pools to renovate affordable housing in a Lynchburg historic district, all -day symposia on pres- ervation and architecture for Rich- mond area teachers, and a new program at Colonial Williamsburg to collect and study architectural fragments were just three of the innovative preservation programs discussed in October in Richmond at the annual membership meeting of the Preservation Alliance. During the day's meetings, mem- ber organizations of the Preserva- tion Alliance had the opportunity to highlight innovative programs that could be transferred for use in other communities. The examples were as diverse as the organiza- tions that make up this statewide preservation consortium. The Lynchburg Historical Foun- dation (LHF) has taken major steps in the past year to deal with issues of preservation and affor- dable housing. In comments by Sandra Crowther of the LHF Re- volving Fund, participants heard how the Foundation, the City, and the Lynchburg Housing Redevelop- ment Authority worked to assem- ble a $1 million loan pool for use in historic areas of the city such as Federai hili. In this particular instance, preser- vationists saw an increasing a- mount of demolition of vacant and deteriorating buildings in an area with some of the city's oldest ar- chitecture. With assistance from Post Office Box 1407 Staunton, VA 24402-1407 (703) 886-4362 FAX: (703) 886-4543 the Alliance, LHF helped to re- verse this trend and now has a video that explains the new pro- gram and its benefits to the neigh- borhood. For information, call LHF at (804) 528-5353. Education is also a large compo- nent of recent preservation activity in Richmond. Historic Richmond Foundation Executive Director John G. Zehmer, Jr. spoke about the Foundation's all -day sympos- ium to teach Richmond -area educa- tors about architecture, preserva- tion, and the city's historic dis- tricts. This year's program, focus- ing on Church Hill, was developed after assistance on heritage educa- tion programs was provided �y the Preservation Alliance. For addi- tional information on the HRF program, call (804) 643-7407. Colonial Williamsburg Founda- tion's new program to catalog and assess architectural fragments that relate to the colonial capital came after the Foundation realized that much crucial information for res- toration could be lost due to care- less storage over the years. Staff member Roberta Reid spoke of the urgency in saving this information and asked other preservationists to consider similar programs in their communities. Roberta can be reached at (804) 220-7432. As participants in the meeting ex- changed ideas, they heard of other innovative programs in place around Virginia. Preservationists in Roanoke have worked with banking institutions through the Community Reinvestment Act to develop designs for appropriate in- fill housing in historic districts. The Council of Virginia Archaeol- ogists has just published the fourth volume of a seven -volume set on Virginia archaeology that is being hailed as a nationwide model. And the Waterford Foundation is con- tinuing to develop its "Waterford Compact" to gain the first right of refusal on key parcels of land sur- rounding this National Historic Landmark in Loudoun County. ANNUAL VIRGINIA PRESER- VATION RECEPTION IS SET The annual Virginia Preservation Reception of the Preservation Al- liance of Virginia will be held on Wednesday, February 3, 1993 in Richmond at the headquarters of the Virginia Historical Society. This reception gives Alliance members the opportunity to meet with legislators during the General Assembly session. An added at- traction will be the presentation of the first annual Virginia Preserva- tion Awards for excellence in pres- ervation in the Commonwealth. MAKE RESERVATIONS NOW FOR DANVILLE WORKSHOP Preservationists are encouraged to make your reservations now for the Eighth Annual Virginia Preserva- tion Conference to be held in Dan- ville on April 15-17. Room availa- bility may be tight as the con- ference date approaches, due to other conferences being held in Danville at the same time. To make your room reservations ($45 single, $55 double), call Howard Johnson's in Danville at 1-804- 793-2000 and indicate you are with the Preservation Alliance. NEW PUBLICATIONS Preservationists will be interested in two wonderful new publications on Virginia's history. The Depart- ment of Historic Resources has just released First People: The Early Indians of Virginia for sale to the general public. Both archaeolo- gists and Native American leaders have enthusiastically endorsed the book for its accurate portrayal of Virginia Indian history. Call (804) 786-3143 for information. Preser- vationists will also be interested in The Making of Virginia Architec- ture, the companion volume to the exhibit at the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts in Richmond. It is avail- able by calling (804) 367-0589. Member organizations of the Alliance are encouraged to make copies of Virginia Preservation Update for distribution to staff and board members. ------------------------------------------------------------ PRESERVATION ALLIANCE O F V 1 R G 1 N 1 A P.O. Boz 1407 Staunton, VAA 24401 HIST RES ADVIS6AY POARD --A1 CP PO BOX 601 WINCHESTER VA 22601 Non -Profit Org. U. S. Postage PAID Staunton, VA Permit No. 10