HRAB 02-18-92 Meeting AgendaI COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703/678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO: Historic Resources Board Members
I
FROM: Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director C IPK
DATE: February 12, 1992
RE: Meeting Notice and Agenda
There will be a meeting of the Historic Resources Board at 7:30 p.m., on February 18, 1992,
in the conference room of the Old County Court House, 9 Court Square, Winchester.
Some informational items are attached for your use. Please let me know if you are unable
to attend.
AGENDA
1. Presentation by Vernon Davis, Vice President of the Loudoun Restoration and
Preservation Society, pertaining to Leesburg's historical sites plaque program.
2. Discussion
3. Other
KCT/slk
attachment
THE COURTHOUSE COMMONS
9 N. Loudoun Street - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
ESTABLISHING A
HISTORIC PLAQUE
PROGRAM
Loudoun Restoration and Preservation Society
in cooperation with
The Town of Leesburg, Virginia
by H. Vernon Davis
Vice President, LRPS
April 5, 1991
r,ol�
oom
0
Z��\
F
Cie
MIA
�PAL0G '� G
4p OF LEES
_ _ 'n
Leesburg in Wirrinia
PRESENTED November 14, 1989
ORDINANCE NO. 89-0-31 ADOPTED November 14, 1989
AN ORDINANCE- AMENDING THE TOWN CODE TO ESTABLISH A HISTORICAL PLAQUE
PROGRAM IN THE TOWN OF LEESBURG.
WH7,REAS, the To.rn of LI-esLurg received a request from the Loudoun Restoration and
Preservation Society to endorse and support the issuanceof historical plaques within the town; and
A7HEREAS, the issuance of historical plaques will give special recognition to important buildings
in Leesburg; providing a better sense of the history of the Town to v'Wt'Ors and citizens
THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows;
SECTION I. Chapter 13, Planning and Development, of the Town
Code is amended by the addition
of a new Article to be known as Article V. Historical plaques_
AR'T'ICLE V. HISTORICAL PLAQUES
Sec. 13-52. TQynance of Historical P res is Endorsed
A Pram to issue plaques to histo
through the Restoration and historically t buildings in the Town of Leesburg
Preservation Society, Inc. is demgn ed a Society is estabiiahe.a The Loudoun
sponsor Shall be fisted the e=lusive sponsor of the histor;=1 and
b responsible for verifying building documentation, determining rel P�4 The
uiidings, issuing the plaques, and selecting a design and man the of
Leesburg ity oBoard of Architectural Review will review and aPProve the for or Plaques. The
dings and the plaque design etermiaing the
See. 13-53. Lasuanee of plaque,"
After a plaque has been iffiued, it will remain a Entire of the building,
the property change, ownership. even in the
The Plaque will be mounted on the front elevation of the event
m
the aPPrOP�e location as determiz� by the sponsor and it will remain with the
property ceases to meet the criteria for eligibility asbuildingg unless
he
determined by the .
Sec 13-5 Qfficisliv recognized vLaque&
Only historical plaques immued by the Loudoun
Permitted
the town. The on the b9 the apo will contain t erz wbich
09k03 of the ism Resto Restoration g.
T;o wX be is the
in tht toga whit$ have not re eivedl Pk � be Mromd
by Beard of Architectural Review. rc and �'°m the sgoss�rr be
A,N, fE-NDl2NG THE TOWN CODE TO ESTABLISH HISTORIC PLAQUES
2
Sec. 13-55. Fees for the plaques.
All fees and expenses for the documentation and review of buildings,, and the manufacturing of the
plaque will be collected and incurred by the Loudoun Restoration and Preservation Society. The
sponsor is authorized to collect fees to cover the cost of the plaques, including research and
administration -
SECTION IL All prior ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
SECTION IV. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage.
PASSED this 14th day of November
,1989.
Robert E. Sevila, yor
ATTEST:
Town of Leesburg
Clerk of Co
?re
In-
Lecsburg in 'Virginia
PR10C-LAibIATION
WHEREAS, "Keeping America's Heritage Alive' is the theme for Historic
Preservation Week 1990, cosponsored by the National Trust for Historic Preservation and
the Town of Leesburg; and /
WHEREAS, Historic preservation gives Americana a deeper understanding of their
richly diverse architectural and cultural heritage; and
Wim, Historic preservation promotes local community pride in America's
towns, cities and rural areas; and
VJE REAS, Historic Preservation Week provides an opportunity for all Americans
to celebrate the protection of our nation's treasures:
NOW, Z' EFORE, I, Robert E Sevila, Mayor of the Town of Leesburg in
Yrginia do hereby proclaim May 13-19, 1990 as BY=RIC PRESERVATION W=
and call upon the people of the Town of Leesburg to recognize and participate in this
special observance by continued efforts for the preservation of our Old and Historic
Distract
/ 6K;V-,4--
Hobert E. Se Mayor
Town of Leesburg
Mav 3, 1990
Date
Loudoun
R,-storation
r .j
Pre5ervation
5odety
Officers:
Mrs William A. Boyd — Pre51denr
Mr. H. Vernon Dovis — Vice Presidenr
Mrs Williom 5_ Alberts — Secrerory
Mrs. �,onk Roflo — Treosurer
Dear Applicant:
The Town of Leesburg has authorized the Loudoun
Restoration and Preservation Society to issue plaques to
designate historic structures in Leesburg. The historic
plaques program is designed to recognize the preservation of
architectural styles, ambience, and historical significance
that have made Leesburg a unique community in a rapidly
developing, twentieth century Loudoun County.
To qualify for a historic plaque, owners must complete
the attached application form, submit current photographs of
the structure, and documentary proof of the structure's age
or historic significance. Applications will be reviewed and
approved using a criteria adapted from the criteria used for
the National Register of Historic Places. This criteria
centers on the age, architectural significance, historical
significance, and preservation of the structure_ Special
recognition will be granted to those structures that appear
on Gray's Map of Leesburg, dated 1878. This map was used as
the basis for the current Leesburg Historic District, as
approved by the Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission.
The Loudoun Restoration and Preservation Society will
review all applications, verify the authenticity of the
application, and approve or disapprove the application.
Once the application is approved, the applicant will receive
the plaque and a certificate suitable for framing.
Upon approval of the application, the applicant agrees
to display the historic plaque on the exterior of the
structure at a location to be determined by the Loudoun
Restoration and Preservation Society. The applicant agrees
that the plaque will remain on the structure in the event of
the sale or transfer of the property to another owner. The
Loudoun Restoration and Preservation Society retains the
right to remove the plaque if the structure is changed so as
to lose the architectural integrity of the structure or if
the significance of the structure is otherwise displaced.
An application fee of $loo must be submitted with the
application. This fee covers the cost of the historic
plaque and the administrative costs of the program. If an
application is disapproved for any reason, the application
fee will be refunded to the applicant.
P.O. Box 351
Leesburg, Virginia
Thank you for your interest,
-- Loudoun Restoration and Preservation Lociety
Applicant:
Name
Address
Loudoun Restoration and Preservation Society
P.O. Box 351
Leesburg, Virginia 22075
APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC STRUCTURE PLAQUE
WITHIN THE TOWN OF LEESBURG
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Application:
Approved
Disapproved
Signature
Date
Home phone Work phone
Please provide the following information on the structure for
which you are seeking the historic plaque. Please print neatly
or type.
Name of building ( if applicable)
Address
Current owner of the property:
Name
Address
Telephone
Current buidling use: Residential Commercial
1
Basis for Application:
There are two categories under which you may apply for a
historic plaque for a building. Please indicate below which of
the two categories best suits the structure:
A Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a
type, period, or method of construction, or
represents the work of a master, or possesses high
artistic values; or
B Associated with a specific historic event or the
life of a person significant in our past.
In addition to these two categories, a building must possess
integrity as determined by the Loudoun Restoration and
Preservation Society. Integrity is defined as the authenticity
of a buildinq's historic identity, evidenced by the survival of
physical characteristics that existed during the building's
historic period.
Construction of the primary portion(s) of the building:
Year Materials Architectural
Style
Primary
portion
Additions
Enclose at least two photographs of the building taken within the
last year which show the basic architectural style of the primary
portion of the building and any additions. These photographs
will be retained by the Loudoun Restoration and Preservation
Society.
Attach any and all documentation which attests to the age and/or
historic significance of the building. We suggest items such as
Town records from the John Lewis Historic Survey of Leesburg;
copies of deeds or other records of sale; old newspaper articles
and/or photographs to document significant events.
On a separate page(s) you may provide a narrative of any
significant features of the building or events that have occurred
in the building which you believe deserve special recognition.
The Loudoun Restoration and Preservation Society will maintain
files of all approved applications. We anticipate publishing a
brochure describing all properties bearing a Historic Plague; the
more information you can provide us, the more interesting this
brochure will be for tourists and residents of Leesburg.
Sign this application, enclose your check for $100 with the
required photographs of the building, and mail to:
Loudoun Restoration and Preservation Society
Attn: Historic Plaque Committee
PO Box 351
Leesburg, Virginia 22075
You will be notified when your application is approved. If
disapproved, your application fee will be returned.
By signing this application, the applicant agrees to the
following terms:
--Applicant agrees to mount the historic plaque on the
exterior of the building cited in this application at a
location to be determined by the Loudourn Restoration and
Preservation Society;
3 -Applicant agrees that the plaque will remain on the
building in the event of the sale or transfer of the
property to another owner; and
--Applicant agrees that the Loudoun Restoration and
Preservation Society retains the right to remove the plaoue
if the structure is changed so as to lose the architectural
integrity of the structure or if the significance of the
building is otherwise displaced.
Signature of owner agent Date
3
I
`CRITERIA FOR THE ISSUANCE OF PLAQUES
DESIGNATING OLD AND HISTORIC STRUCTURES
IN THE TOWN OF LEESBURG
For purposes of this document a building is any structure
created by man in connection with any human activity. In
considering a building for the issuance of a plaque under the
approved criteria, only the building as a whole will be examined.
No wing, facade, or other part of a building may, by itself,
qualify for a plaque.
No building will be considered for designation as old and
historic unless it is at least 50 years old, unless it is the
site of an historic event, as defined hereafter.
Those buildings
1878 will be entitled
that the integrity of
been maintained.
which appear on Gray's Map of Leesburg of
to a specially designed plaque provided
the original architecture and design has
Those buildings that do not appear on Gray's Map, but
satisfy the age requirement, may qualify for a plaque of slightly
different design if they meet the following criteria:
A The building must be a good example of its type (e.g.
Greek Revival), of its period (e.g. Victorian), or of
its method of construction; or represent the work of a
master craftsman, or possess high artistic value; or
B The building must be associated with a historic event
or the life of a person significant in our past; and
-C The building must possess physical and historical
integrity.
Def in it ions:
Criterion A: A building is a "good example of its type"
when it displays many or most of the characteristics usually
associated with the style in which it was built, whether those
characteristics show up in its exterior ornamentation, its
architectural arrangements, its use of materials, or in other
ways. Similarly a building is a good example of its "period"
when it displays many or most of the characteristics of buildings
built during a particular time period, whether those
characteristics show up in its exterior ornamentation, its
architectural arrangements, its use of materials, or in other
ways characteristic of the period. Some buildings may possess
the characteristics of two types or periods and may thus be
significant as examples of transitional types or styles.
Similarly, a building which is a good "example of a method of
construction" displays many or most of the construction
characteristics usually associated with buildings so constructed.
A building that "represents the work of a master craftsman" may
either display many or all of the principal characteristics of a
named craftsman's work, or simply the principal characteristics
of very high quality work, from which the deduction is made that
the builder was a highly skilled craftsman. The definition of "a
building of high artistic value" is a matter of aesthetics. A
building will rarely have to be judged on "artistic value" alone.
On such judgments opinions differ but a consensus should be
possible in every case.
Criterion B: For a building to be considered in this
category It must be associated in a significant way with a person
who has made a significant contribution to our hi -story, or with
an historic event.
Criterion C: Every building which is to qualify as old and
historic, in a ition to meeting the requirements of either
Criterion A or B must also "possess physical and historical
integrity." In this contest the phrase means that the building
in question retains the major physical characteristics that have
generally defined its appearance through the years and that its
additions and restorations have not overwhelmed its -original
character; that it remains in the location in which it was built,
or in a similar and suitable location; that it is, in fact, as
old as it is said to be; that it is an original, however altered,
and not a copy; that its historical associations are verifiable
by acceptable evidence, whether such is documentary, or oral
history.
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING APPLICATIONS
FOR PLAQUES DESIGNATING OLD AND HISTORIC STRUCTURES
IN THE TOWN OF LEESBURG
The Leesburg Town Council designated the Loudoun Restoration
and Preservation Society (LRPS) as sole agent for issuing plaques
designating old and historic structures within the town. To
evaluate applications for these plaques, LRPS has adapted the
criteria used by the National Park Service to evaluate structures
for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.
Structure is defined to be a building created to shelter
human activity. The building should include all its basic
structural elements. Parts of buildings like facades, or wings,
will not be considered independently of the rest of the building.
A structures generally will not be considered for old and
historic designation unless it is at least 50 years old.
Exceptions may be made if the building is the site of an historic
event; these cases will be considered individually by the LRPS.
LRPS gives special recognition to those structures that
appear on Gray's Map of Leesburg dated 1878 if those buildings
have maintained the integrity of the original architecture and
design. Gray's map was used by the Town to establish the Old and
Historic District. Special recognition will be given to these
structures by a distinctively designed plaque for these
buildings.
To qualify for a plaque, in addition to the requirement that
the building be at least 50 years old, the following criteria
must also be met:
A embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,
period, or method of construction, or represent the
work of a master, or possess high artistic values; or
B associated with a specific historic event or the life
of a person significant in our past; and
C possess integrity. Integrity is the authenticity of a
building's historic identity, evidenced by the survival
of physical characteristics that existed during the
building's historic period.
Note that a building must meet.criterion A or B, but in either -
case, must also meet criterion C. Details on how these
criteria will be evaluated is printed on the following pages.
1
Criteria A: ARCHITECTURAL STYLE
Structures must embody the distinctive characteristics of a
type, period, or method of construction, or represent the work of
a master, or possess high artistic values.
Embodying the distinctive characteristics of a type, period,
or method of construction means illustrating the way in which a
building was conceived, designed, or fabricated by a people in
past periods of history. Representing the work of a master
refers to illustrating the technical and/or aesthetic
achievements by a craftsman. Possessing high artistic values
concerns the expression of aesthetic ideals or preferences and
applies to aesthetic achievement.
The features or traits of design or construction that tended
to recur in particular types, periods, or methods of construction
can be said to characterize those kinds of properties or
construction practices in the past. To "embody distinctive
characteristics" a building must clearly represent the type,
period, or method of construction. Characteristics may be
expressed in terms such as form, structure, plan, style, or
materials. They may be general, referring more to ideas of
design and construction, such as basic plan or form, or they may
be specific, referring to precise ways of combining particular
kinds of materials.
A building would be eligible, for instance, which is
identified under the theme of Gothic Revival architecture, if it
possesses the distinctive characteristics that make up the
vertical and picturesque quality of the style, such as: pointed
gables, steep roof pitch, board and batten siding, and ornamental
bargeboard and veranda trim.
A building that has some characteristics of the Romanesque
Revival Style and some characteristics of the Commercial style
can qualify as an illustration of the transition of architectural
design. Such a property is eligible if it is a significant
representative of that architectural transition.
A building is not eligible if it possess some
characteristics but not in such a way that the property is a
clear example of its type. For example, ineligible properties
might include a residence dating to the 1890's that cannot be
evaluated within an important theme such as a significant
architectural style or practice; or a commercial building with
some Art Deco detailing that would not be recognized as a clear
expression of the Art Deco style or of the transition betweEn
that style and another style.
2
The phrase "typ,e, period, or method of construction" refers
to properties related by cultural
of construction or style; or b tradition, or function; by date
y choice or availability of
materials and technology.
High artistic values may be expressed in many ways,
including areas as diverse as design,
sculpture. planning, engineering, and
A building can be significant under this criteria either for
the way it was originally constructed or crafted; or for the wa
it was adapted at a later point in time; or for the way it
Illustrates changing tastes, attitudes, and uses over a y
time in the past, period of
an
A building may be significant because it represents either
unusual or a widely practiced t
Of
It may have been innovative or influential, Ore or methdit may nhavecbeen.
traditional or vernacular; thesignificance of the buildi
determined by considering the building within -its context.ng is
Criteria B: ASSOCIATION WITH HISTORIC EVENTS OR PERSONS
To be considered under this criterion, a building must be
associated with an event or person that has made a significant
contribution to our history. If related to an historic event, it
must be documented through accepted means of historical research
that the property under consideration did exist at the time of
the event and that the property was directly associ
event. ated with the
For consideration of a building through its associations
with a person who has made contribution to our history, the
individual(s) must be specifically identified.
association with an individual must be documented b accepted
methods of historical research that can include writtencortoral
history. The length of association should be identified and may
be an important factor when considering an application. y
3
Criteria C: INTEGRITY
A building must possess integrity. Integrity is the
authenticity of a property's historic identity, evidenced by the
survival of physical characteristics that existed during the
property's historic period. If a property retains the physical
characteristics it possessed in the past then it has the capacity
to convey association with historical patterns or persons,
architectural or engineering design and technology, or
information about a culture or people. Documentation to support
the authenticity of structure is critical to establishing the
structure's historic value.
Integrity is a quality that applies to historic buildings in
five ways: location, design, materials, workmanship, and
feeling. Integrity of location, design, and so on, depend on the
retention of various physical characteristics that make up a
property.
Location is the place where the building was constructed or
placed. Often the original function of the building dictated the
location; the relationship between function and location provides
insight to the development of the commercial and residential
areas of Leesburg.
Design is the composition of elements that comprise the
form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. It is
based upon the needs, technologies, aesthetic preferences,
attitudes, and assumptions of a people or culture in each period
of history. Design results from conscious decisions in the
conception and planning of a property and may apply to areas of
endeavor or creativity as diverse as community planning,
engineering, architecture. Principal aspects of design include
organization of space, proportion, scale, technology, and
ornament.
The design of a building reflects historical functions and
technologies as well as aesthetics, and includes considerations
such as structural system; massing; arrangement of space;
fenestration pattern; textures and colors of surface materials;
and type, amount, and style or ornamental detailing.
Materials are the physical elements that were combined in a
particular pattern or configuration for a building. The
integrity of materials determines whether or not an authentic
historic resource still exists.
Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a
particular culture or people during any given period in history.
4
It is the evidence of craftsmen's labor and skill in constructing
a building, or altering, adapting, or embellishing a building.
Workmanship may be expressed in vernacular methods of
construction and plain finishes or in highly sophisticated
configurations and ornamental detailing. It may be based on
common traditions or innovative period techniques. Workmanship
is important because it can furnish evidence of the technology of
the craft, illustrate the aesthetic principles of a historic or
prehistoric period, and reveal individual or local applications
of both technological practices and aesthetic principles.
Feeling is the quality a building has in evoking the
aesthetic or historic sense of a past period of time. Although
it is itself intangible, feeling depends upon the presence of
physical characteristics to convey the historic qualities that
evoke feeling.
A building will meet the criteria for integrity if it exists
today essentially as it did during its period of significance.
It must be an actual historic resource, not a recreation; the
majority of the building must be intact or undisturbed; and if
-recent work on the building has occurred (such as
rehabilitation), the work must have been done according to
professional standards that ensure preservation of the historic
materials and the significant features of the building.
A building changes over time. The retention of integrity
depends upon the nature and degree of alterations or changes. It
is not necessary for a building to retain all the physical
features or characteristics that it had during its period of
significance. However, the building must retain the essential
physical features that enable it to convey its past identity or
character and therefore its significance.
To be eligible for a plaque, a moved building significant
for architectural value must retain sufficient historic features
to retain integrity of design, materials, workmanship, feeling,
and association, and therefore to convey its architectural
significance. The building, in its new site, must retain the
essential physical features or characteristics that make it a
good example of the particular architectural style.
5
Intl
k-'oLaoun.
..qw.O..�-s-&Wove- � Y', ----
, 00cief 9
ctnc
v A *I
Tke w I v 0
rognf
P
N STO Itl C BUILDING PLPtQUE40
OF
Name,
Loc m iott
P la$tke
WS His+oric Pia$tje COMM) Qe,
Data
1992 SESSION
LD1920396
1 HOUSE BILL NO. 1029
2 Offered January 21, 1992
3 A BILL to amend and reenact §§ 10.1-2200, 10.1-2203 and 10.1-2205 of the Code of
4 Virginia; to amend the Code of Virginia y, adding sections numbered 10.1-2206.1,
5 10.1-2206.2, and 10.1-2206.3,• and to repeal 10.1-2206 of the Code of Virginia, relating to
6 historic resources of the Commonwealth.
7
8 Patrons—Parrish, Agee, Armstrong, Ball, Bennett, Cantor, Councill, Cranwell, Croshaw,
9 Crouch, Cunningham, J.W., Cunningham, R.K., Deeds, Diamonstein, Dickinson, Guest,
10 Hargrove, Jennings, Jones, Marshall, Martin, McClure, Mims, Moore, O'Brien, Parker,
11 Phillips, Purkey, Reid, Reynolds, Robinson, Smith, Wagner, Way, Wood and Woodrum;
12 Senator: Colgan
13
14 Referred to the Committee on General Laws
15
16 Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:
17 L That §§ 10.1-2200, 10.1-2203 and 10.1-2205 of the Code of Virginia are amended and
18 reenacted, and that the Code of Virginia is amended by adding sections numbered
19 10.1-2206.1, 10.1-2206.2, and 10.1-2206.3 as follows:
20 § 10.1-2200. Definitions.—As used in this subtitle unless the context requires a different
21 meaning:
22 "Board" means the Board of Historic Resources.
23 "Department" means the Department of Historic Resources.
24 "Director" means the Director of the Department of Historic Resources.
25 "Historic district" means a geographically definable area which contains a significant
26 concentration of historic buildings, structures or sites sharing a common historial,
27 architectural or cultural heritage, as determined in accordance with regulations
28 promulgated pursuant to § 10.1-2205.
29 "Majority of landowners" means the owner or owners of a majority of the land area
30 contained in a district, or the owners of a landmark, building, structure, object or site.
31 § 10.1-2203. Board of Historic Resources membership; appointment; terms.—A. The
32 Virginia Historic Landmarks Board within the executive branch of state government is
33 continued as the Board of Historic Resources and shall consist of seven members. The
34 members of the Board shall initially be appointed for terms of office as follows: two for a
35 one-year term, two for a two-year term, two for a three-year term, and one for a four-year
36 term. Appointments thereafter shall be made for four-year terms, except appointments to
37 fill vacancies occurring other than by expiration of term, which shall be filled for the
38 unexpired term.
39 B. In making appointments to the Board the Governor shall consult with agencies and
40 organizations in Virginia that represent landowners and business interests that may be
41 affected by historic preservation activities, and agencies and organizations in Virginia that
42 have as their principal interest the study of Virginia's history and the preservation of
43 Virginia's historic, architectural, archaeological, and cultural resources. - -
44 § 10.1-2205. Historic designation; board shall promulgate regulations; penalty.— A. The
45 Board shall not (i) designate a historic landmark, building, structure, district, object, or
46 site, (ii) recommend that property be listed in or be determined eligible for listing in. the
47 National Register of Historic Places, or (iii) recommend that property be designated as a
48 National Historic Landmark, except as provided in this article.
49 B. On or before July 1, 1994, the Board may promulgate regulations necessary to carry
50 out the purposes and provisions of this chapter not inconsistent with the National Historic
51 Preservation Act (P.L. 89-665) and its attendant regulations. The regulations of the Board
52 shall be promulgated in accordance with the Virginia Administrative Process Act (§ 9-6.14:1
53 et seq.).
54 A violation of any regulation shall constitute
a Class 47 mis a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
House Bill No. 1029 2
penalty is Pfeseribed bY t#e GeEle of ;,
C. Regulations promulgated by the Board shall establish, at a minimum:
1. Objective criteria for the identification of landmarks, buildings, structures, districts,
objects and sites as historic, and for the designation of historic districts . and historic
landmarks,'
2. Objective criteria for making recommendations that properties be listed in or
determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, or be designated
as National Historic Landmarks;
3. Procedures for conducting reviews required to be made by any state agency
pursuant to § 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (P.L. 89-665), and reviews
required under any law of the Commonwealth regarding the effect of the expenditure of
any funds or the issuance of any permit by any agency of the Commonwealth on or for
any historic district; and
4. Procedures for the making of any identification, designation or recommendation by
the Board pursuant to this chapter.
§ 10.1-2206.1. Procedure for designating a historic district, landmark, building, structure,
object or site; National Register of Historic Places, National Historic Landmark, public
hearings; historic district defined.—A. Following the promulgation of regulations by the
Board as provided in this article, nominations for designation of any property as a historic
landmark, building, structure, district, object or site, or for a recommendation that a
property be listed in or determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places, or designated as a National Historic Landmark, may be made by the owners of
the property, or of any property within a proposed district, or by the Director.
B. In any county, city or town where the Board proposes (i) to designate historic
districts, landmarks, buildings, structures, objects or sites, or (ii) to recommend that
property be listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic
Places, or (iii) to recommend that property be designated as a National Historic
Landmark, the Department shall notify the governing body and all owners of real property
located within and adjacent to the proposed district, or which is the subject of the
proposed listing, recommendation or designation, of the proposed action by the Board.
C. Prior to making any historic designation, recommendation or determination, the
Board shall hold a public hearing at the seat of government of the county, city or town in
which the proposed historic district or subject property is located, or within the proposed
historic district. The Department shall publish notice of the public hearing in a newspaper
having general circulation in the county, city or town for two consecutive weeks setting .
forth the purpose, place and time of the hearings. Written notice shall also be given to
the owners of all real property proposed to be included in any historic district, which
notice may be given concurrently with the notice required to be given to the landowner
by subsection B. The hearing shall be held within sixty days following the Department's
initial notice to the governing body. The hearing shall be for the purpose of supplying
additional information to the Board, and for determining whether the proposed landmark,
building, structure, district, object or site meets the criteria established for designation as .
historic, or should be recommended for listing in or determined eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places, or designated as a National Historic Landmark.
§ 10.1-2206.2. Formal hearing; evaluation of economic impact; consent of majority of
landowners.—The Board shall not (i) designate a historic landmark, building, structure,
district, object or site, (ii) recommend that property be listed in or be determined eligible
for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, or (iii) recommend that property be
designated as a National Historic Landmark, until:
1. The Board has conducted a hearing, which shall be in addition to the public hearing
required pursuant to subsection C of 10.1-2206.1, in accordance with the formal litigated
issues hearing provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act (§ 9.6-14.12);
2. The Board has found by a preponderance of the evidence that the criteria for
3 House Bill No. 1029
1
promulgated pursuant to this article have been satisfied with respect to all of the property
2
within the proposed historic district or which is the subject of the listing or designation;
3
3. The Board has conducted an evaluation and prepared a report on the potential
4
economic impact of the proposed designation, recommendation or determination on the
5
use and development of the property within the proposed historic district or which is the
6
subject of the listing or designation; and
7
4. A majority of landowners of the real property within a proposed historic district, or
8
of the landmark, building, structure object or site proposed to be designated as historic,
9
have consented in writing to the designation, recommendation or determination.
10
§ 10.1-2206.3. Removal of historic district designation; redesignation.—On or before July
11
1, 1994, a majority of landowners of any historic district, or any historic landmark,
12
building, structure, object or site, designated prior to the effective date regulations
13
promulgated pursuant to this article may advise the Director in writing that they object
14
to the continuation of the designation. Upon receipt of such notice by the Director, the
15
designation of the property as historic shall be removed unless the Board designates the
16
property as historic in accordance with the provisions of this article and the regulations
17
promulgated pursuant to this article.
18
2. That § 10.1-2206 of the Code of Virginia is repealed.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
-�
44
Official Use By Clerks
45
Passed By
46
Delegates The House of Dele
g Passed By tThe Senate
47
without amendment ❑ without amendment ❑
with amendment ❑ with amendment ❑
48
substitute El substitute El49
substitute w/amdt El substitute w/amdt ❑
.
50
- - -
--
51
Date: Date:
52
53
Clerk of the House of Delegates Clerk of the Senate
IIE WASHINGTON POST
SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1992
Bt filing Up Stapes on Historical Claims'
Ta. Bill Would Let Landowners—Not Preservationists—Decide .
By John F. Harris
WI -hi -91— Pox Slain wrilet
RICHMOND—Developer Lee
Sammis has big plans to build a
sprawling complex of houses and
businesses on nearly 5,000 acres he
owns at the Brandy Station Civil
War battlefield in Culpeper County.
So he was not pleased two years
ago when preservationists fighting
his project had the land declared
part of a Virginia Historic District.
This year, Sammis struck back.
Two Northern Virginia lawmakers
are sponsoring legislation—drafted
with the help of Sammis's attor-
ney—that would allow Sammis and
nearby landowners to revoke the
historic district status.
Even more worrisome for pres-
ervationists, the Sammis bill also
would dictate that from now on, no
site in Virginia could be declared
historic by the state unless a ma-
jority of its owners agree.
Outraged preservationists are
.calling the measure, sponsored by
Sen. Charles J. Colgan (D -Prince
William) and Del. harry J. Parrish
(R -Manassas), a "developer relief
act." They protest that the measure
would undermine efforts to identify
and protect Civil War battlefields
and other historic areas in Virginia.
Many rural landowners—not just
Sammis, and not just developers—
are calling the bill a needed check
on preservationists and slow -
growth activists. Landowners say
the current law is being improperly
used to thwart legitimate develop-
ment by classifying parcels of land
as historic sites when they really
have little significance_
Colgan's bill, which drew strong
support in a subcommittee, is ex-
pected to come up for a vote by the
full Senate Agricultural, Conserva-
tion and Natural Resources Com-
mittee tomorrow.
When a site is declared a historic
landmark by state government, the
owner becomes eligible for state
grants to finance improvements.
The designation does not formally
prohibit building or carry other re-
strictions. But Colgan and others
argue that as a practical matter,
being declared historic can make it
much harder to win rezoning from
local governments or approval to
widen roads, and therefore the
change in status lowers land values.
Hugh C. Miller, director of the
Virginia Department of Historic
Resources, denies that. "We are not
a regulatory agency," he said, add-
ing that the point of historic desig-
nations "is information and educa-
tion."
Miller said it makes little sense to
give landowners veto power over
whether property is included on the
state's list of historic sites. "The
question is," he said, "is it historic
or is it not historic?"
The fracas involves many of the
same people who squared off so bit-
terly three years ago in the dispute
over whether Northern Virginia
builder John T. '"Cil" Hazel Jr. could
See HISTORIC, C5, Cal. 1
u µ f sarily-restrict themselves to:}con
Virginia � Bill Would.�Give{)
fvenienCsizes,"Boasberg said... e
Merely being declared historic,
Landowners
Upper Nand
Boasberg noted, doesn't determine
what action county boards such as
-the one in Culpeper—which strong-
ly suppgrts Sammis's project—take
HISTORIC, From CI
Miller said he doesn't object to
on zoning such sites. "What's im-
portant is to identify, and identify
build a shopping mall next to
refining the procedures his agency
follows, but argues that landowners
, completely, what happened" that
Manassas National Battlefield Park.
John Foote, Sammis's attorney, is
_
are simply mistaken if they feel that
makes the site historic, he said.
In addition to Sammis, the largest
a partner in the law firm founded by
the historic designation process has
hurt land values.
landowner by far, the Brandy Sta-
Hazel, and previously was the at-
torney for the Prince William Board
Developers have not produced
tion district includes land controlled
by dozens of fanners and homeown-
of County Supervisors. The county
figures to document what they say
is the decline in values. Foote said
ers. Many of the smaller landown-
ers from Culpeper and Prince tail-
board, eager for the tax dollars that
Hazel's William Center mall would
the effect on property values is hard
liam, some of them elderly citizens
have provided, lost out when Con-
to prove because tax -starved local
who had hoped to retire on money
gress bought the property and
governments often are reluctant to
lower real estate assessments. But
made by selling their property,
turned out at the General Assembly
stopped the development.
A leader the other side of this
he asserted that it is universally
last week to lobby on behalf of the
year's General Assembly fight is
understood within the real estate
bill. Preservationists also flooded a
preservationist Annie Snyder, who
industry that "once land is desig-
public hearing last week. The Na -
trounced Hazel in the William Cen-
noted historic, it's marketability
y iS
Gonal Trust for Historic Preserva-
ter fight. She said she is worried
diminished."
tion, which has more than 25,000
that if the Colgan -Parrish measure
Snyder argued that Bristoe Sta-
members in Virginia, has organized
passes, the historic district around
tion landowners "have been filled
a letter -writing campaign against
the Bristoe Station battlefield in
Prince William would be revoked.
with misinformation." Declining
land values, she said, are the result
the bill.
Colgan said he agrees that allow -
Sammis, who lives in California,
of the poor real estate market in
ing Foote to help draft his bill cre-
could not be reached for comment.
Foote said he has made no attempt
the current recession, not the work
of historic preservationists. "All the
ated an appearance that he is cater -
ing to developers. But he said his
to hide that the bill he drafted for
land in Prince William Count y has
interest in the issue springs less '
Colgan was designed to help Sam-
mis. The bill would allow landoWn-
g one down," she said.
Foote said the land at Brandy.
from the Brandy Station project
than
than the Bristoe Station historic
ers in three historic districts cre-
ated- since 1988—including the,
Station,.the site of the Civil War's
largest cavalry battle, is a classic
in his district. '
He said di was outraged b the
g y
Brandy Station property and Bris-
.
example : of how
P preservationists.
experience of _ some landowners
there, who he said saw their prop- '
toe Station—to revoke the historic
district status.
overstep their bounds. While -no one,
denies that some of the land de-
• erty values fall ,after the site was
. But he said other parts. of the
serves. protection, he said,. the,
declared historic.
One, of the landowners;• Claire
bill—drawing up procedures for
14,000 -acre historic district cre-..
i.RoiGns, said a contract her family
more public comment and,review ...ated
before the state decides which lands'.;.
by the state went well beyond,,;;,
the most significant territory..:.';
had signed to sell their land near
are declared historic—would .help
:.
` _ ' :Tersh Boasberg, attorney for. a. -
Bristoe Station fell- through: after,
the area was declared historic.
resolve controversies that routinely
group of preservationists at Brandy
"I. lost our contract.. I lost our
spring u across the state. .
P g P
"One of our fundamental con-
Station and also a veteran of the
William Center fight, disputes that
future," said Rollins, who claims her
' "historical.
terns is that the Department of His-`
'uhder
• .
the district is too large. - "History
family's land is insig,
nificant .... It's a shan&'they.re
toric Resources operates no
due -process provisions," Foote said.
and huge battles, especially those
fought on horseback, do
taking history and using I64W,,a°
not neces-
shield to stop development."
M ■ ■
W
BBOARDREVIrm-a'
WS
PRESERVATION ALLIANCE OF VIRGINIA
No. 15 • November/December • 1991
Inappropriate Alterations
to Roofs
Architectural review boards (AP -Bs) are fre-
quently confronted with requests for alter-
ations of historic roofing material. Of-
tentimes the buildings will have been al-
tered in earlier rehabilitations, creating
additional review problems for the ARBs.
The review board must first decide what
past changes have achieved significance in
their own right and are also faced with
choices about repair versus replacement
with new material.
The newly published Historic District Hand-
book from the Preservation Alliance ad-
dresses the roof issue as seen in the fol-
lowing excerpt:
In some instances, such as with many com-
mercial structures, roofs are barely visi-
ble from the street and are much more impor-
tant from a maintenance than a design
standpoint. However, with many residential
buildings, the roof is a critical design
element as well, with both the shape and
materials contributing to the significance
of the building.
Roof shapes come in several different types
in Virginia, the most common being:
• shed roofs which give the appearance of a
flat roof from the street
• gable roofs with a triangular piece of
wall at the ends of two sloped surfaces
I
Shed Gable Hip Complex
• hipped roofs, in which all surfaces slope
to meet in a point or ridge at the center
of the building
• complex roofs which combine hipped and
gable roof forms and often include towers
and turrets
Besides shape, roof materials can be an
important part of a building's design and
should be considered when reviewing roof
maintenance or rehabilitation issues. Com-
mon roofing materials include metal (galva-
nized steel, tin, or copper in rolled
sheets with standing seams), metal shingles
(often decorative), slate (shingles, often
with a decorative shape and color), terra
cotta (fired clay tiles), composition (as-
phalt -impregnated felt or fiberglass shin-
gles), and tar or asphalt -saturated ply felts
(built-up roofing material traditionally
used on flat roof commercial buildings and
often replaced today by single ply synthe-
tic roofs).
Roof repair and maintenance questions are
often among the most difficult facing an
ARB, and review boards are encouraged to
become familiar with life -cycle costs and
long-term benefits associated with the var-
ious roofing materials used in the local
community. Without this information, ARBs
are often swayed by false claims of exces-
sive initial costs. As always, claims of
economic hardship must be fully and fairly
reviewed so as to give both the applicant
and the protected resource their due
consideration. Many ARBs will face the
following issues concerning roof repair:
• changes to the material where modern ma-
terials such as composition shingles are
proposed as substitutes for historic ma-
terials such as metal shingles
• roof deterioration that is resulting in
water damage to the interior of the
building and must be addressed
• longstanding problems with the water re-
moval system of flashing, gutters, cop-
ing, and downspouts and calls for re-
placement of this system with inappropri-
ate new shapes and materials
• removal of key decorative and functional
elements such as chimneys, skylights,
decorative iron work, and towers that
give character to the building
• the addition of skylights, antenna, and
solar collectors
Roof guidelines should stress regular main-
tenance and appropriate systems to remove
water from the building. Roof shapes and
materials should be maintained where pos-
sible and new materials should be compati-
ble where used. In communities where roof-
top additions and decks are possible (such
as urban areas like Alexandria), the guide-
lines will need to address appropriate and
inappropriate changes that will be visible
from the right-of-way.
Two of the Interpreting the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation bul-
letins address roof alteration issues:
numbers 82-031 an 82-038. Call the Allia-
nce office at 804-979-3899 for copies of
these two bulletins.
Alliance Publishes New
Historic District Handbook
As part of its year-long project to upgrade
assistance to Virginia's ARBs, the Preser-
vation Alliance has just published a new
Historic District Handbook especially for
members of architectural review boards in
the Commonwealth. The book was prepared
with assistance from a grant from the De-
sign Arts Program of the National Endowment
for the Arts.
The new Handbook was prepared by Alliance
executive director David J. Brown with as-
sistance from Al Cox, AIA. Al previously
served on the Alliance staff as the ARB
Coordinator, has served on the review board
in his hometown of Dallas, Texas, and cur-
rently serves as staff for the ARB in Alex-
andria, Virginia.
The main body of the Handbook has six
parts, including sections on the authority
for historic district zoning (HDZ) in Vir-
ginia, information about local ordinances,
an outline of key players in the HDZ pro-
cess, notes on delineating historic dis-
tricts, a long description on the develop-
ment and use of design guidelines, and an
overview of how to make the review process
work. An extensive appendix includes an
annotated ordinance (based on the research
of Alliance trustee Oliver Pollard), infor-
mation on legal challenges to HDZ, a list-
ing of ARBs in Virginia, and more.
YES! I want to order copy(les) of the
Historic District Handbook. Enclosed is
$ ($35 for members; $50 for non-mem-
bers). Please mail it to:
Name
Address
City/State/Zip
PAV, P.O. Box 295, Charlottesville VA 22902
ARBs Can Call on Alliance
Staff and Trustees for
HDZ Workshops
As part of the four workshops held in Novem-
ber for ARBs in Virginia, the Alliance de-
veloped an extensive slide show and sup-
porting materials on HDZ issues in Virgin-
ia. This information can be prepared to
help an ARB in addressing issues of local
concern.
The staff and certain trustees of the Al-
liance are available to meet with ARBs in a
training session. To obtain information on
fees and availability, contact David Brown
at the Alliance office (804-979-3899).
Working With a
City Attorney
The following article is excerpted from a
Preservation Law Update prepared by the
National Center for Preservation Law.
A sympathetic city attorney can do much to
back up the work of a local historic preser-
vation commission or ARB. An unsympathetic
city attorney can undermine the commis-
sion's effectiveness in many ways. What
can a preservation commission do to turn an
unresponsive city attorney into a positive
advocate for the commission's role in city
government?
The commission's chairman should try to
schedule annually a meeting with the appro-
priate person in the city attorney's office " -
(which commission staff might also attend).
This meeting could be with the city attor-
ney himself, or it may involve a more junior
member of the city's legal staff. The im-
portant thing is to establish contact with
someone of the city's legal staff, and hope
that a good relationship between that of-
fice and the preservation commission can
mature over time.
The commission's chairman should, where
possible, thank the city attorney or his
representative in writing (and prior to any
meeting) for help given during the previous
Year. Make it clear that the city attor-
ney's help is occasionally needed, that the
commission hopes not to abuse its relation-
ship with the city attorney, and that the
commission knows how to say "thank you."
What a commission should strive for is a
close working relationship with an identi-
fied individual on the city's legal staff
who will be willing to review with commis-
sion members (or staff) any application
which promises to be difficult. Problem
applications are often obvious. When a
problem can be identified in advance, a
little basic legal advice from the city
attorney may be a simple precautionary mea-
sure which will let members of the commis-
sion sleep more easily at night.
The chairman can be helpful by pointing our
resources in the commission's office that
could help the city attorney in the future.
Information about other preservation or-
dinances or reporting services, the Nation-
al Center for Preservation Law (or the
Preservation Alliance of Virginia) should
be mentioned. Ideally, an arrangement for
sharing information between the preserva-
tion commission and the city attorney's
office will keep both entities in city
government better informed.
If a specific category of application cau-
ses problems for the commission, it is time
to ask for the city attorney's advice. (But
remember that most city attorneys are un-
familiar with the routine work of a local
preservation commission: don't put the
city attorney on the spot by asking a direct
question without providing needed back-
ground information.) Keep the city attor-
ney's role as simple as possible.
When a major challenge to a commission's
authority is filed, an informed city attor-
ney will be a necessary asset for the ARB.
Spring Workshops to Include
Sessions for ARBs
The annual Spring Preservation Workshops of
the Preservation Alliance of Virginia are
just around the corner, and as in previous
years a complete track of sessions will
focus on the work of ARBs in Virginia. This
year's workshop, again co-sponsored by the
Virginia Department of Historic Resources,
is scheduled for March 27-28, 1992, in
Charlottesville.
The Review Board track is entitled Charlot-
tesville Cases: Virginia Issues and will fo-
cus on local issues that have statewide
importance. Speakers will discuss how ARBs
should communicate their role with the pub-
lic at large; will ask why an ARB should
care about archaeology; and will consider
the issue of "clandestine" demolitions. An
afternoon session will look at the ques-
tions associated with institutional neigh-
bors in historic districts, with case stu-
dies that include universities, hospitals,
and churches.
As in previous years, tours and special
events will also be a part of the Spring
Workshops. Participants in the 1992 ses-
sions will have the opportunity to see some
of Central Virginia's finest architecture.
Brochures on the Spring Workshops will be
mailed to all Alliance members and ARB mem-
bers in February. Look for your copy and
register early for what promises to be an
exceptional workshop. Information on the
Spring Workshops can be obtained by calling
the Alliance office at (804) 979-3899.
Publication of Review Board News is sup-
ported in part by a Design Arts Grant from
the National Endowment for the Arts.
PRESERVATION
Non -Profit Org.
n # ALLIANCE U. S. Posta
PAID
Staunton, VA
P.O. Bac 293*� rr Permit No. 10
Ch.iom-1k. VA
2ZO2-0295
\� L8���;
HISTORICAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOAT
KRIS C TIERNEY AICP
PO BOX 601
WINCHESTER VA 22601
>� N — -
v 1161111d LCNdl a I ICi1� Ut t �1�lul Ic' sources
221 Governor Street • Richmond, Virginia 23219 • (804) 786-3143
No. 11 YEAR END REPORT - 1991
During 1991, the Department of Historic Resources continued to demonstrate that preservation
addresses broad community issues, delivering services to citizens and groups with pressing
needs. Working closely with individuals, local governments and private organizations, the
Department tackled challenges in economic revitalization, helping communities recycle downtown
buildings by rehabilitating abandoned shells with inviting, historically significant cultural places
in which people congregate. It met critical urban housing needs in working with private groups
to enable the conversion of empty public school buildings into low-cost apartments for the
elderly. It helped achieve balance between historic preservation and growth and development
by negotiating a planning agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation, to ensure
that a community's cultural properties are taken into consideration when roads are planned.
Environmental responsibility was promoted in the Department's project review process, which
provides advice on the protection of historic resources in federal and state projects.
How to manage growth on a human scale and still maintain a sense of character and place in
a community were two issues addressed at a Heritage Tourism conference, co-sponsored by the
Department. The conference addressed questions about how a communityplans for an increase
in visitors to its attractions without jeopardizing the quality of life for its residents. The
Department led a study on the future of Route S, one of Virginia's scenic byways. The
discussions represented a microcosm of growth and development needs and natural, scenic and
historic values. Looking ahead to rural development, the Department began to focus on the
assets of Virginia's Civil War battlefields and agricultural landscapes which represent a
important pan of Virginia's cultural heritage and economic future.
The Department's deputy director, H. Bryan Mitchell, began a two-year term as president of
the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers. Virginia's active participation
in the Conference provides the opponunity to examine from a national perspective the role of
the state preservation programs in the management of change, growth and development.
The thrust of all the Department's programs is to encourage localities to consider and preserve
their cultural heritage. The Department works to raise awareness of all citizens about historic
resource values, what is at stake in their loss and how their preservation will enhance a
community's quality of place for the present and the future.
The Department, in partnership with local governments, private organizations and individuals,
works to protect Virginia's historically significant places, buildings, sites, districts, objects and
landscapes.
Survey: Identifying Virginia's historic resources is the first step in the Department's efforts
to protect Virginia's cultural heritage. Knowledge of historic buildings and sites and where
they are located is necessary to understand a community's history and to make informed
decisions about their preservation. The body of information collected through surveying
efforts provides an important data base of Virginia's history and prehistory.
♦ The Department provided direct financial assistance to nine counties, four cities
and one town. These resulting survey efforts accounted for the recording of
8,738 properties in 1991, including 7,779 buildings and 959 newly identified
archaeological sites. Joining the Department in this effort were Caroline,
Hanover, Clarke, Roanoke, Warren, Frederick, Powhatan, Nelson, Stafford, and
Arlington counties; the cities of Richmond, Williamsburg, Fairfax, Virginia
Beach and Petersburg and the Town of Wytheville.
♦ The partnership between the Department and interested Virginia localities, was
responsible for the survey of 222,737 acres or 348 square miles.
♦ The Department initiated more partnership projects for survey of 829,310
additional acres and 4,127 properties to be added to the statewide inventory by
June 30, 1992.
♦ The Department's Roanoke Regional Office completed architectural surveys of
the Catawba Valley, Pearisburg, Smith Mountain Lake, Salem and Bent
Mountain, resulting in the recording of over 1,000 historic properties in surveys
covering more than 50,000 acres.
♦ The Department surveyed and evaluated 44 major Civil War sites and assisted
the National Park Service survey of Shenandoah Valley battlefield sites.
♦ The Department undertook a public review of major findings of its recently
completed comprehensive survey of state-owned buildings and grounds at
Virginia's public institutions of higher education, corrections and state parks.
The Virginia and National Registers: The evaluation of surveys and the designation process
recognize the most significant historic properties in a community by formally listing them
on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register of Historic Places. Both
registers serve as planning and educational tools for the state and local governments to
factor these irreplaceable buildings and sites into community planning for present and
future needs.
♦ At the request and with the participation of property owners, interested local
organizations or localities, the Department submitted nominations for 126
individual buildings and districts to the National Register in 1991, bringing the
total number of entries to 1,530 representing 31,108 contributing properties that
have been formally designated.
♦ The Department nominated four archaeological districts encompassing 28 sites
to the Virginia and National registers in 1991.
♦ The Department prepared final evaluation reports for 12 preservation surveys
recently completed by the staff in the communities of Blackstone, Herndon, Cape
Charles, Brentsville, Farmville, the cities of Petersburg and Richmond, and
Orange County and two rural community surveys in the Roanoke region. This
effort resulted in the recording of 5,428 additional sites in the statewide
inventory.
♦ Students in the historic preservation program at Mary Washington College,
supervised by Department staff, completed nomination forms for six properties
that were nominated to the Virginia and National registers.
Certified Local Governments: This program supports local governments in becoming active
partners in the state and federal preservation program.
♦ The City of Fairfax and Clarke County became the state's newest Certified
Local Governments in 1991.
♦ The Department provided on-going technical assistance and guidance to the
eight existing Certified Local Governments, including Culpeper, Pulaski,
Herndon, Petersburg, Lynchburg, Suffolk and Prince William County.
♦ The Department awarded five federal CLG grants for work that was completed _
in June 1991, and seven for work to be completed in June, 1992, including
production of educational materials in Fairfax, Lynchburg, Suffolk, H,;rndon and
Manassas, rehabilitation projects in Herndon and Pulaski and survey and register
projects in Clarke County and Petersburg. All CLG awards are matched with
local funds and in-kind services. The Department provided technical assistance
for all Certified Local Government projects.
♦ The Department continued its efforts to promote the CLG program to
communities around the Commonwealth, seeing it as one of the best partnerships
for effective community preservation programs. Department staff conducted a
workshop for Certified Local Government grant recipients and provided
information on the Certified Local Government program to 26 Virginia localities.
Rehabilitation Tax Credits: The Department guides owners who wish to rehabilitate
historic properties through this federal program that provides substantial income tax credits
for their work.
♦ In 1991, 32 properties were determined eligible for the rehabilitation tax credit
program.
♦ The Department and the National Park Service reviewed and approved 32
proposed projects, representing an investment of $23,339,500, that are now
underway.
♦ The Department worked with architects, owners and developers of 18
previously approved projects that were successfully completed in 1991. These
recycled historic buildings for adaptive reuse represented an investment of
$3,116,315.
♦ Project proposals totalling $351 million have been submitted to and approved
by the Department since 1977. Completed preservation projects using the
investment tax credits have accounted so far for more than $171 million of
investment in Virginia since 1977.
Project Review: Timely review of government projects ensures that all feasible efforts are
made to preserve historic buildings and sites while the project is in the planning stage. This
program results in the Department's working closely with nearly three dozen federal and
state agencies ranging from the Virginia Department of Transportation to the U. S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
♦ The Department formally responded to 2,591 federal agency actions, including
1,245 determinations of effect; of these determinations, 1,007 produced findings
of "no effect" of the proposed project on any identified historic properties; an
additional 183 produced findings of no adverse effect, and 55 resulted in a finding
of adverse effect.
♦ The Department reviewed 58 proposals for demolition of state-owned buildings
and 107 requests for comments on proposed new construction or modification of
state-owned historic buildings.
♦ Following the initiative of the Governor, the Department of Historic Resources
and the Department of Transportation signed an agreement establishing
procedures for the timely review of all state -funded highway projects to ensure
that historic resources are taken into account.
♦ The Department negotiated and implemented a model Programmatic Agreement
with the City of Richmond to expedite review of Community Development Block
Grant projects. This agreement will serve as a model for similar agreements in
other communities.
♦ The Department instituted a computerized logging and tracking system to
accelerate retrieval of data on state and federal projects and to ensure more timely
response to public and private requests for information.
Easements: Owners of historic properties have the option to donate a preservation easement
to the Commonwealth, thereby ensuring the perpetual preservation of the resource. The
Department provides technical assistance and guidance to owners of properties with a
historic preservation easement to assure appropriate treatments and protection. All
easement properties are listed on the Virginia Landmarks Register.
♦ The Department received donations of 17 new preservation easements in 1991
encompassing 1,347 acres and four city or village lots, including an easement on
Berry Hill, a National Historic Landmark estate in Halifax County.
♦ Department staff continued its policy of inspecting all 161 preservation
easements held by the State on a regular two-year basis.
♦ Receipt of new easements brings the total acreage protected by the Depart-
ment's preservation easement program to 13,027 acres and 88 city or village lots.
Virginia Main Street Program: Direct technical and marketing assistance is provided to
towns and small cities in Virginia that are willing to commit local resources toward the
revitalization of their downtown commercial districts. The Department, in cooperation with
the Department of Housing and Community Development, provides funds for architectural
design assistance to local businesses who choose to improve the facades of their buildings
and to recycle historic buildings, using innovative marketing techniques.
♦ Fourteen communities have participated in the Virginia Main Street Program
since 1985 - Bedford, Franklin, Petersburg, Winchester, Culpeper, Pulaski,
Manassas, Lexington, Suffolk, Emporia, Galax, Herndon, Radford and
Warrenton. Twelve of these communities already have historic districts that
incorporate the commercial areas recognized by the Virginia and National
registers.
♦ Frazier Associates, under a contract with the Department, responded to 209
requests for technical assistance and drawings for facade improvements from
merchants in the nine active Main Street communities, bringing the total number
of design assistance requests to 767 since the program began in 1986. 45 percent
of these requests resulted in completed projects. Training workshops were held
for Architectural Review Boards in all Main Street communities during the year.
Virginia Historic Preservation Foundation: The Foundation's mission is to acquire
threatened historic properties and to sell these historic sites and buildings to sympathetic
owners to ensure their permanent protection and preservation.
♦ The Department provided professional staff support to the Preservation
Foundation which has acquired four historic structures since 1990, including two
houses in the Federal Hill Historic District in Lynchburg, the Citizens Bank in
Bedford and the Red Lion Tavern in Winchester. The two Lynchburg properties
were sold in 1991 with protective preservation covenants, and the Foundation,
with Department assistance, is actively marketing the Bedford and Winchester
properties.
The Department is responsible for ensuring that there is an accurate, permanent
and publicly accessible record of Virginia's material culture.
Collections: The Department is responsible for the guardianship and cataloguing of the
artifacts entrusted to its care. Its collection of 17th -century artifacts is one of the most
significant in the nation. Overall, its collections represent all areas of the state and all
periods of Virginia's history, from 10,000 years ago to the present. The collections are used
continuously by researchers and institutions in the entire mid-Atlant:c region.
♦ A curatorial staff of three professionals manages 1.2 million artifacts from over
400 archaeological sites around the Commonwealth.
♦ Five interns from Virginia Commonwealth University, the University of
Richmond and Longwood College provided 1,640 hours of work to the
Department's archaeological program while receiving instruction and supervision
from Department staff.
♦ $25,000 in non -state funds for the curation program have been generated
through cooperative projects and services.
♦ 3,529 boxes of artifacts are kept at the Department's Cary Street Curation
Facility in Richmond's Shockoe Bottom where they are available for public use.
♦ Three to five individuals a week have used the Department's study collections
for artifact identification and research projects. Department collections were used
for 14 individual research studies.
♦ Nine major research institutions, including Colonial Williamsburg, the Museum
of Early Southern Decorative Art, the Smithsonian Institution and the Virginia
Museum of Natural History, have used portions of the Department's collections
for research projects in 1991.
♦ The Department completed a report to Governor Wilder and the General
Assembly on curation issues and costs of regional versus central curation
facilities. One conclusion was that a centralized facility would save the Common-
wealth between $10 and $20 million compared to a series of regional facilities.
♦ The Department made a major commitment to ensuring public use of the
collections of artifacts, working with local museums, libraries and other
organizations to place eight educational exhibits throughout the state.
Archives: The Department maintains an inventory, accessible to the public, of over 60,000
files and maps, representing the documentary knowledge of Virginia's heritage; the
archives' staff ensures that appropriate measures are taken to maintain as needed the
information resulting from the survey of the Commonwealth's historic buildings and sites.
♦ Department staff provided technical assistance and guidance to 833 patrons who
visited the Department's archives in 1991. Clients included 351 consultants, 244
representatives of state or federal agencies and 244 private citizens, researchers
or writers.
♦ The entire collection of the Department's architectural and archaeological
survey files, maps, photographs, slides and books was reorganized for improved
access to materials by the public.
♦ The Department inaugurated the use of the Integrated Preservation Software
program to facilitate retrieval of information on selected structures and archaeo-
logical sites.
♦ Working with the Council on the Environment, Department staff entered
locational information and boundaries for all coastal Virginia properties on the
Virginia and National registers and all preservation easement acreage onto the
Council's integrated environmental maps.
Threatened Sites Research: The Department is committed to the proper excavation of
threatened archaeological sites as resources are available.
♦ Archaeological research projects sponsored by the Department generated
$13,000 in outside donations for those projects.
♦ The Department completed excavation commitments at Jordan's Point in Prince
George County; the Habron Site in Warren County and the Graham -White Site
in the City of Salem.
♦ The Department is conducting post -excavation analysis and supervising the
production of written reports for 14 projects across the state.
The Department actively works to enhance public knowledge and appreciation of
the historic structures and sites in Virginia, pursuing all avenues to impart to the
broadest audience of public officials and citizens the enduring value of those
properties.
Publications: The Department produces publications with information on Virginia's historic
resources and on the programs designed for their protection.
♦ The Department produced and distributed two issues of Notes on Virginia, the
Department's semi-annual journal, and six issues of Footnotes the Department's
bi-monthly newsletter, to 7,450 individuals, organizations and government
officials in 1991.
♦ The Department published and distributed 2,300 copies of "Vision and Choice,"
a 16 -page illustrated booklet explaining the Department's preservation easement
program.
♦ The Department published a technical report on Fincastle Kiln in Botetourt
County; an archaeological survey report on Craig County; an interim report on
the architectural survey of Hanover County; and a bibliography of theses and
dissertations on Virginia's material culture.
Public Presentations and Education
♦ The Department led state efforts to observe National Historic Preservation
Week with co-sponsorship of a conference on Heritage Tourism and Economic
Development. The Department also organized a comprehensive program of radio
and television interviews, newspaper articles and two public service television
spots aired across the state.
♦ The Department coordinated the Second Annual Virginia Archaeology Week,
reaching 3,000 people through 102 events sponsored by 79 local and statewide
organizations and 125 library exhibits. Informational materials included a
custom-designed poster, bookmarks and a special calendar of events.
♦ The Department held public hearings attended by 150 people in Richmond,
Prince William, Norfolk and Roanoke on Senate Joint Resolution 162 and
hearings in Charles City, James City and Henrico counties on House Joint
Resolution 457 on Route 5 attended by nearly 200 citizens in connection with the
preparation of two studies assigned to the Department by the 1991 General
Assembly.
♦ The Department held a public hearing and participated in presentations at 10
other public meetings on the proposed burial regulations that were adopted by the
Historic Resources Board in June, 1991.
♦ The Department held public hearings in seven localities to make presentations
and receive comments on proposals to nominate historic districts to the registers.
♦ Department staff made presentations at the Second Annual Environmental
Education Conference on the place of historic preservation in formal educational
programs.
♦ The Department designed and displayed an exhibit at the Virginia State Fair,
highlighting the importance of archaeology in understanding the lives and times
of the men who framed the U. S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
♦ Department staff made seven major public presentations on the preservation
easement program.
♦ The Department's Project Review Section held a workshop for Richmond City
Housing officials and interested contractors to address issues of rehabilitating
historic buildings for housing units using federal funds.
♦ The Department co-sponsored an archaeological :field school at Jordan's Point
in June -July, 1991.
♦ Educational efforts of the Roanoke Regional Preservation Office included
development of an "archaeology box" for elementary school teachers and hosting
visits to Buena Vista for students in the Roanoke area.
♦ The Department co -hosted the annual meeting of the Society for Historical
Archaeology which attracted nearly 1,000 people from around the world to
Richmond in January, 1991.
♦ The Department director presented historic district plaques in public ceremonies
to mark five newly recognized districts in localities across the Commonwealth.
Historical Highway Markers: The Department manages Virginia's historical marker
program. Historical signs, funded entirely from non -state monies, note sites, events and
individuals that are significant in the Commonwealth's history.
♦ In 1991, the Department processed requests and prepared texts for 30 new
markers and five replacement markers that were approved by the Historic
Resources Board. The new signs are located in 23 counties and four independent
cities. Sponsors, who paid for the markers, included individuals, families and
private organizations.
CALENDAR
Tuesday, February 18, 1992 State Review Board, Richmond, 10:00 A.M.
Wednesday, February 19, 1992 Historic Resources Board, Fredericksburg, 10:00 A.M
Wednesday, March 11, 1992 Virginia Historic Preservation Foundation, Richmond,
10:00 A.M.
Historic Resources Board State Review Board Preservation Foundation
John R. Broadway, Chairman,
Richmond
John G. Zehmer, Jr., Vice -
Chairman, Richmond
George C. Freeman, Jr.,
Richmond
Arnold R. Henderson, V, Rich-
mond
Richard R. G. Hobson, McLean
Nancy H. Hirst, McLean
Sandra D. Speiden, Somerset
Daniel P. Jordan, Chairman,
Charlottesville
Tony P. Wrenn, Vice -Chairman,
Fredericksburg
Michael B. Barber, Roanoke
S. Allen Chambers, Jr.,
Lynchburg
Nellie White Bundy, Tazewell
Pamela J. Cressey, Alexandria
Gary R. Grant, Danville
Arnold R. Henderson, V, Rich-
mond
Mary Douthat Higgins, Rich-
mond
Mary L. Oehrlein, Strasburg
Anne R. Worrell, Charlottesville
David J. Brown, Chairman,
Staunton
Patricia L. Zontine, Vice -Chair-
man, Winchester
Kevin J. Burke, Reston
Dr. Francis M. Foster, Jr.,
Richmond
Robert B. Lambeth, Bedford
Anne R. Worrell, Charlottesville
Eddie N. Moore, Ex -Officio,
State Treasurer
Hugh C. Miller, FAIR, Execu-
tive Secretary, Director, Depart-
ment of Historic Resources
FOOTNOTES u fia W iu p.n by a g.mt r wn th. N.tia l Nrk &M- U. S. Dep.n"vte of the Imm;or.
Ur
der T"06 VI of the CIAaiglW Aad 1954 and Seafm 3(W f othe
Rclnbiliuum M o! 1973, d¢ U. S. Dcp. o! Os hg dm pmhibiu d"ummwtim m the buu of use. color, m iaW origin o hmdk� m fu f.&,Uy md pmgr�,._ ((yin belin+e
ym h.w been diecrim wd ag.imt m vey Pmgr.m m ativfty m f dlity dumbed abme, a if you deein Ponbcr Lim. pk.ec w+iu m: Off fw
of Oe hnerior, W.hingtm, D.C. 2022 0. The avmnea and rH'ol OpPonuai h. US. Dept.
ap-m of "' pub y U. do M ta.1—d ,elks ,he vices or poI'rcb of the Dep. of the h.erior, mr dm Oe memim of
tr.de e.r,ee a avmxrti.l Pma� a m..tieee mdo.x�a u. RmmR„d.r M U. Dep. of ue Ime.�«.
I09ZZ
VA •b31S3H3NIM
Gavoa I09 X09 '0'd
xbcSlAGv S30ii00S3b BI090�SIH
9ZZ1 'ON JIWHHd
VA 'UNOWH31H
lIld
wZ661 7
aisO6 d �sn I 1
H.LVH ?PInH
I ,
61 Z£Z emt8nA'puowyaig . laajlS jouwano0 IZZ
s53ino6puolsi
3o�uau��J�daQ cubi�