Loading...
HRAB 11-17-92 Meeting AgendaMEMORANDUM TO: Historic Resources Advisory Board FROM: Ron Lilley, Planner II FX— RE: Meeting Date and Agenda DATE: November 9, 1992 FILE C COUNTY of FRFT)FRTry Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 There will be a meeting of the Historic Resources Advisory Board on November 17th, 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. Establishing legislative contact person for Preservation Alliance. 4. 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 October meeting are enclosed. Please review these in preparation for our upcoming meeting: 1. A summary of the October meeting. 2. A copy of the staff memo to the Planning Commission regarding their discussion of historic preservation methods, including the draft proposal on identification of sites and HRAB review of proposed development. 3. A summary of the Nov. 4th Planning Commission discussion. 4. A copy of Planning Director Bob Watkins' memo based on the Planning Commission discussion, which includes suggestions for HRAB actions. 5. A copy of staff's findings on options for securing technical expertise for the HRAB. 6. A copy of staff's findings related to the plaque program. 7. Notice regarding the Virginia Preservation Alliance's need for a legislative contact for the Frederick County HRA -B. S. Informational copies of DHR letters on Rose Hill and Opequon/Route 622. 9. Informational copy of November issue of "Virginia Preservation Update". 10. A copy of the HRAB membership address/phone no. list. 11. A copy of pertinent pages of the County Comprehensive Plan regarding HRAB's function and related actions by the County. Summary of 10/20/92 Meeting Attendance Members: Ray Ewing Mary Jane Light Gary VanMeter Lee Tavlor Staff: Ron Lillev Agenda items: 1. Proposed procedural changes for developments affecting historic resources. Not everyone had a copy of the documents from the August meeting concerning proposed procedural changes for developments affecting historic resources. Staff agreed to provide all members with those documents. There was some discussion of the draft proposal to require HRAB review of proposed developments which affect specified historic resources. Among the concerns were whether to notify landowners ahead of time if their property was being considered for inclusion on a list of historically significant sites. It was agreed that the 11/4 Planning Commission discussion of historic resource matters would be a good chance to get some Ping. Cmsn. input on such notification. y There was also some concern about not having the expertise for evaluating proposed historic area overlay districts as well as proposed developments affecting historic resources. It was noted that Maral Kalbian was not a member of the HRAB and, with completion of her Rural Landmark Survey contract, could not be expected to assist the HRAB without remuneration. Staff was asked to look into options for securing technical expertise for the HRAB. Ray Ewing and Mary Jane Light indicated their intentions of attending the Nov. 4th Ping. Cmsn. discussion. 2. Plaque Program design contest Staff presented his finding that the administration at James Wood High School enthusiastically embraced the idea of having students participate in the proposed design contest. Members discussed and agreed to think more about the parameters of the desired plaque to impose on the contest. It was also agreed that the HRAB should reserve the riLht not to use any of the entries. More discussion would be required in November regarding specifics of the contest, including plaque dimensions, wording, judging and awards, and contest timeframe. There was C, consensus that the contest should be limited to the High School students and that it should get underway with the second semester. Staff was asked to research expected costs and whether or not certain shapes were more feasible to produce. 3. Other a. It was agreed that a list of the HRAB members, with addresses and phone numbers, would be helpful for all members to have. b. Staff was asked to check with the EDC about whether a list of historic sites for tourism promotion was being developed. c. Staff was asked to find out when Maral Kalbian would be presenting her Rural Landmarks Survey slide presentation to the Board of Supervisors. COLJNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 70-3/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Director RE: Discussion of Possible Historic Preservation Methods DATE: October 2, 1992 The staff would like to have a discussion with the Planning Commission concerning methods which the County might employ to try and preserve significant historic sites throughout the county. As most of you are aware the Caleb rezoning resulted in a great deal of discussion and negotiation over what portion of the tract should be preserved. To fill in those of you who were not on the Commission at the time of this rezoning and to refresh the memory of those who were, I will try to summarize. The Caleb rezoning involved 211 acres located just north of route 7 and east of interstate 81. The entire parcel was to some degree involved in the Third Battle of Winchester, with a central portion having contained the majority of the fighting. An application for rezoning from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) was submitted in May of 1989 and was finally approved by the Board of Supervisors in May of 1990. Throughout the course of the year between the submittal of the application and the approval there were numerous meetings between the applicant, their engineers and legal council, the Historic Resources Advisory Board, various preservation groups, members of the Planning Commission and Board and the planning staff. Nearly all these meetings centered around trying to reach a compromise between what the preservationists wanted set aside and the developers interest in a profitable development. The problem the County faced was that the property was located within the Urban Development Area and was in no way "flagged" as being in any way significant. The existing RA zoning present on the parcel at the time of the application would have allowed development of five acre lots with no required open space. The developer ultimately agreed to dedicate acreage to an agreed upon public agency or private organization, to place appropriate screening and signage, to offer all of the land for sale at fair market value, to 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 delay any development of the parcel for one year, to phase the development so that the most significant portion if the property would be developed last, and to accept any fair market value offer on this portion of the property. The process described above took a full year and involved innumerable hours of staff time as well as the time of HRAB, Planning Commission and Board members. Some would argue that the process was a failure and that the site was essentially "lost". The fact of the matter is the County was caught in a very. difficult position. It would have been a gamble to turn down the rezoning and hope that the developer would not put the parcel in five acre lots with no public access or land set aside. The county chose to negotiate the best deal we could under the circumstances. What the staff would like to propose is that we implement some method whereby properties that are of undisputed historical significance are somehow marked so that a potential large scale developer is put on notice that certain steps will need to be taken to protect the historic aspects of a site if it is to be developed. This would be an effort to give the county more leverage when it comes time to negotiate the terms of a rezoning or Master Development Plan. We could adopt language that sets out the items that we would expect to be addressed when planning a development on a "recognized" site. This proposal is not intended to apply to small scale development such as family divisions, small rural subdivisions or building permits. It is intended to focus on properties in and around the UDA where the scale of permitted developments could completely eliminate many historic sites. KCT/slk attachment DRAFT HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROCEDURAL CHANGE AND ADDITION TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE Presently the County's Zoning Ordinance states that the impact statement prepared as part of a rezoning application should include "preservation of historic structures and sites located on the land to be rezoned". Staff would suggest that this be expanded slightly to include a discussion of the method(s) of preservation proposed. Also it would be appropriate that for certain sites more detailed information be required including information on the treatment of the historic aspects of the site. This raises the issue of a list of locally significant sites. If the county chooses to develop requirement that will apply to certain recognized sites then perhaps we should publicize a list of such sites. In this way when a developer purchases a property he will be on notice that the county feels the site, or some portion of it, is of some significance and that he will be expected to address the preservation of that portion of the site. The HRAB has compiled a list of roughly 150 sites with the aid of the Rural Landmarks Surveys that have recently been completed for the County. These sites are those which the HRAB feels possess some historical significance. One possibility would be for this list to become part of the Comprehensive Plan. Another approach might be to have an independent document to note the sites on our computer mapping. Either way there are a number of issues to be addressed concerning whether or not a property owner has some say in their property being placed on this list. One argument would be that if the County deems the property to be significant it is only fair to put the owner (or future owners) on notice so that if and when they propose to rezone the property or submit a Master Development Plan they will know that they will be expected to address the historic aspects of the site. Another change that the staff is recommending is that our application process be modified so that the HRAB be a regular review agency on Rezonings, Master Development Plans and Site Plan applications that involve a historic site. This would mean that the applicant would have to solicit comments from the HRAB on his\her application and submit these comments as a part of the application package. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Additional language for areas to be addressed by rezoning proffers. 2-6-5.8.18Pi^op©sed method(,} of -Preservation of historic structures and sites located on the land to be rezoned. Proposed addition of section pertaining to recognized historically significant sites. Historically significant Sites or Structures. The intent of this section is to insure that private restrictions are established in order to protect and preserve historically significant sites and\or structures. The following requirements shall apply to all development proposals affecting land which contains a site and\or structure which has been recognized as historically significant by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or is listed on the State or National Registers of Historic Places. A harmonious placement and coordination of uses, architectural styles, signs, and landscaping shall be provided to insure the aesthetic quality, integrity and value of the historic site. Deed restrictions, dedications, agreements, contracts, guarantees, or other means shall be instituted to insure that such coordination occurs. Buffering of noncompatible uses should be provided in such a way as to minimize distraction from, and disruption of, the historic site or structures present. Deed restrictions, dedications, agreements, contracts, guarantees or other means used to insure the above shall provide specific standards and means for enforcement. The Historic Resources Advisory Board shall review such methods and make a recommendation as to whether they accomplish the intentions of this section. The Historic Resources Advisory Board shall not control particular designs, styles or methods used as long as the requirements of this Chapter have been met. Summary of November 4th Planning Commission Discussion of Historic Resource Issues The attached Northern Virginia Daily article provides a pretty good summary of the Nov. 4th Planning Commission discussion of Historic Resource issues. Other noteworthy items from the discussion not covered in the article: a. The Planning Commission seemed receptive to the idea of notifying landowners ahead of time that the County is considering indicating that their property is considered historically significant and seeing whether they would have any objections to that. If the landowner would object, identification of that property could be foregone. b. There was no real consensus about whether the list of about 150 properties currently being considered should be used. Rather, there seemed to be an interest in paring that list down substantially. c. The Planning Commission seemed receptive to the idea of having the HRAB as a normal review agency for Rezonings and Master Development Plans affecting specified historic properties. Al2 Northern Virginia Baily IV V1 e 1 Thursday, November 5. 1992 h].n, w% s 'sof-, d-----Innvl Y���,� LUTA r_ V V-13 By Charlotte J. Eller Daily Staff Reporter Developers of large-scale projects need to find ways to deal with important historical sites on their land, the Frederick County Planning Commission was told Wed- nesday night. The county should have a method that marks proper-, ties of undisputed historical significance so developers know in advance that certain steps must be taken to protect the historic aspects of sites, Deputy Planning Director Kris C. Tierney said. "All we're suggesting is that when large-scale devel- opments come in, they should find ways to address his - CIL n11"M1ASIMUlu �.r�`.��.w *tertonc �,. es torical values," Director of Planning Robert W. Watkins said. Essentially, if we got a master plan today on an historic site, the issue would come up and it would have to be addressed," he said. "But it would not have the appropriate basis in an ordinance. All we're suggesting is the need to address historic issues in large-scale de- velopment should be in the ordinance." Tierney cited the May 1990 rezoing of the 211 -acre Caleb Heights subdivision on state Route 7, the site of the Third Battle of Winchester, as an example of the way the county worked with the developer, preserva- tion groups and county committees to reach a com- promise "between what preservationists wanted to set aside and the developer's interest in profitable devel- opment." Negotiations took more than a year and the county was caught in a difficult position, he said. When a master development plan is prepared for a large-scale development, historic issues should be ad- dressed just as environmental issues such as wetlands, woodlands, steep slopes and flood plains now are, Tierney said. Developers of large projects now must set aside 30 percent of a tract as dedicated open space. "We are not suggesting (developers) be required to do more than they already are required to do," Watkins said. But developers could include historic areas in open space or incorporate historic buildings into their devel- oeent plans, he said. "But they would have to be true historic structures," said Watkins, citing Creekside Village at Kernstown. "We're not talking about someone's shed." If the commission is going to consider a site's historic significance, it needs to warn people in advance that it will be considering those areas, rather than waiting until the plan comes before it, Watkins said. The concept will be reviewed by the Historic Resources Advisory Board and other planning commit- tees, he said. Commission member Blaine Wilson said he is con- cerned about the potential for devaluing a property owner's land because of restrictions placed on the site. PLANNERS AM Planners -- Continued from Al2 "Idon't want to put any restric- tions on it which would decrease its value," he said. But studies show that citing a Property's historic qualities in- creases its value by about to per- cent, Mary Jane Light, vice chair- man of the Historic Resources Ad- visory Board, said. "We have to preserve our heritage." Losing his- toric structures such as the Hackwood House would be "a trag- edy," she said. The advisory board recently com- piled a list of historic properties. "We can't destroy the heritgage of the communitv" commission I member Roger Thomas said. While he is sensitive to property rights, he said a developer who in- corporates historic values may find that his land is more valuable. TO: FROM: SUBJECT.- DATE: UBJECT:DATE: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development MEMORANDUM Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 Robert W. Watkins, Planning Director �n"V / Planning Commission Discussion Historic Preservation Methods November 5, 1992 Based on the Planning Commission discussions on November 4, I would suggest that we need to pursue the following actions: 1. Develop a requirement under the supplementary use section of the Zoning Ordinance that development subject to the master development plan process be required to develop a plan for the preservation of significant historic sites, structures and areas within the framework of current requirements. The plan would be based on currently required or proffered densities. intensities, and open space ratios. In other words; the requirement to preserve historic areas in master planned developments could not be used to lessen the allowed densities or increase the required open space. In many cases, the developer might have to disturb portions of the historic area in order to achieve allowed densities. However, the developer would have to consider the historic values in the layout of the plan. This might be a requirement that is independent of any local registry of significant sites. This would provide additional protection for historic sites in relation to large scale development, but would also protect land owners from the arbitrary imposition of preservation requirements during the master plan process. 2. Find a way to develop a local registry of historic sites in a manner that would not adversely impact individual property owners. 3. Develop a procedure for the routine inclusion of HRAB review of larger scale development involving significant historic issues. We need to pursue this first with HRAB and then with DRRS. You are welcome to use this memo as you wish. RWW!rsa cc: Ron Lilley, Planner II 9 tiomh Loudoun Street P.O. Box 6,01 WinchCS,Cr. VA 22601 Winchester. `A. 22604 Technical Expertise for the HRAB I contacted Maral Kalbian to find out about her interest in providing technical expertise to the HRAB on an as -needed basis. She is interested in such an arrangement and proposed a contract of $30/hour plus mileage. I also called Karen Clay, former Director of Preservation of Historic Winchester, to find out whether she would be interested in such an arrangement. As of the time for mailing this agenda, I have not heard back, but expect to before our meeting. I will report my findings at our meeting. I also discussed the possibility of funding such an arrangement with Planning Director Bob Watkins. He indicated that the Department may be able to fund this within limits, but would need a budget proposal to consider it. Plaque Program Info. 1. The second semester at James Wood High School begins around January 29, 1993. Assistant Principal Fran Jeffries remains enthusiastic about having a design contest during the second semester. 2. I contacted Vernon Davis of the Loudoun Preservation Society to learn about their source of plaques. He told me that they used 'Equestrian Forge" in Leesburg and were very satisfied. They pay $35. per plaque (bronze with brass tone finish) and an order takes about 2 weeks to fill. That compares to $63. per plaque that Historic Winchester pays for their plaques from "Williamsburg Bronze Corp." in Kingwood, WV. I contacted "Equestrian Forge" and learned that, generally speaking, there is a good range of shapes/designs that can be produced without too much variation in the cost of producing a mould. We also discussed options for design assistance, mounting, and related products that could be useful for presentations and/or to award donations. I will provide those details at our meeting. 3. The HRAB will need to discuss more particulars of the contest, including plaque test, and prize awards. 4. The "Historical Marker" reserve fund could be tapped for design contest awards. That would require BOS approval. Virginia Preservation Alliance Legislative Contact The Preservation Alliance of Virginia (in Staunton j has asked Lis to provide a contact for the preservation legislative network. We need to get back with them soon, so this should be decided at our meeting. Staff could be the contact point if that is thought best. ONIINIONWEALTH of VIRGINIA Hugh C. Miller. Director October 26, 1992 Robert Watkins, Director Frederick County Planning 9 Court Square P. O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Department of Historic Resources 221 Goernor Street Richmond, Vireima 23219 RE: Rose Hill, Frederick County (DHR File N4 34-115) Dear Mr. Watkins: TDD: (804) 786-1934 Telephone (804) 786-314; FAX. (804) 225-4261 At its October 21 meeting, the State Review Board determined that Rose Hill appears to meet the criteria for listing on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register of Historic Places. The staff of the Department of Historic Resources does not plan to prepare the national register nomination which is the required next step in the registration process, as our work program is fully scheduled for the remainder of the year and we normally limit our preparation of nominations to those properties for which the Department is accepting an easement. Should the preparation of a nomination go forward you will be notified prior to any formal action by the Department or the Board. Thank you for your interest in the register program. Should you have any questions or concerns regarding the registration process, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, �� U"t'�o James Christian Hill National Register Assistant Ii�� E �� r COMMONWEALTH of VIRQINI�11 Hugh C. Miller, Director September 17, 1992 Robert Watkins, Director Frederick County Planning 9 Court Square P. O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Department of Historic Resources 221 Governor Street Richmond, Vireinia 23219 RE: Rose Hill, Frederick County (DHR File Ns 34-115) Dear Mr. Watkins: 2ccQWel� !>> TDD: (8041 786-1934 Telephone (804) 786-3142. FAX: (804) 225-4261 Recently the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, the Commonwealth's agency responsible for administering historic preservation programs, received information regarding the history and significance of Rose Hill. This information was submitted by the owner, Mr. R. Lee Taylor along with a request that the department conduct a preliminary evaluation of the property to determine whether it is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmarks Register. I must emphasize that this evaluation does not constitute a formal action to add this property to those registers. The National Register and Virginia Landmarks Register are lists of properties important for their prehistoric and/or historical associations. Only those properties found to be significant for their associations with events or persons or determined to be good examples of an architectural style or method of construction are eligible for inclusion on the registers. Additionally, properties must meet age and integrity standards. Inclusion on the registers applies no restrictions regarding what the owner may do with his property. Registration makes a property eligible for protection and financial incentives such as easement donations, tax credits for rehabilitation and grant funds, not available to unregistered properties. More importantly, registration is a way of honoring the significance of a historic property and recording its history and appearance by collecting information that becomes a permanent record in the Department's archives. The information submitted about this property has been considered by the department's National Register Evaluation Team, a group of staff representing a variety of disciplines and agency programs, at one of its semi-monthly meetings. It is the staff's opinion that Rose Hill is an eligible historic resource. While this review is not dependent upon an owner's consent, we are notifying the owner and you of the department's evaluation so that you can participate in this process should you so desire, and so that you may know to contact us should you have any questions. We will make a recommendation that this property is an eligible historic resource to the State Review Board, an advisory group consisting of preservation professionals from throughout the state. We anticipate that the board will consider the staff recommendation regarding the eligibility at its upcoming meeting. Meetings of the board are open to the public. The meeting will be held on Wednesday, October 21", 1992, in the Historic Council Chamber on the third floor of the Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center, 907 Princess Anne Street, Fredericksburg, Virginia, beginning at 10:OOam. As with the staff's evaluation, the Review Board's conclusion does not constitute any formal action to nominate this property to the registers. If the Review Board concludes that this property is eligible for registration, the applicant or any other interested party may wish to prepare and submit the more extensive formal register nomination. Prior to any action to register the property, federal and state regulations require the department to notify the owner, as well as local officials, and give both the opportunity to express opinions on the nomination before any formal action is taken. Though the formal notification requirements come into effect only when a formal nomination is being considered, we want to call your attention to the fact that the historical significance of this property is being considered and we would welcome any additional information you may wish to share with us. The enclosed materials should explain in more detail the register process and the implications of listing. However, should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sinctly 0 H. Bry Deputy Enclosures HBM/jch COly11��fl�T�'E�';Li _ of y'IRCITIA -augn c. Wier. ^hector Department of Historic Resources „l Go -.e -no, - October 26, 1992 Richmond- Virzima -3219 John Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator 9 Court Square P. O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Route 622 Improvements, Opequon Creek Frederick County VDHR File No. 92-0243-F Dear Mr. Rilev: TCO: (804) 786-19-4 Teieonone (804) 786-" = FAX (804) 225-4261 Our agency has recently considered the significance of a _potential historic district in Frederick County according to criteria established by the National Register of Historic Places. This "significance evaluation" was made as part of the review of a state -funded project, the proposed improvements to Route 622 by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Our review of highway improvements is required pursuant to a Memorandum of Agreement between our agency and VDOT for state projects. Based on a report prepared by VDOT's consultant, we believe that the village of Opequon Creek is eligible for listing on the National Register as a historic district. Please note that the evaluation was made solely for the purpose of project planning, and that we do not intend to formally nominate the historic district to the National Register of Historic Places. Attached is a map showing the historic district boundaries proposed by VDOT. We believe the boundaries should be reexamined at some future time to determine if Tokes' Inn and the dwellings around it should be included. Due to the minimal project impacts, we are not requesting VDOT readdress the boundary within the context of this project. If you would like information on how to participate in decisions made concerning the treatment of each by the VDOT, please contact Elizabeth Hoge of our staff. We encourage you to take the significance of this resource into consideration in Frederick County's planning program. Sincerely, H. Bryam Mi chell - - - Dep uty;tat Historic Preservation Officer - I j i). i� .i. � a�n %lll:i�/IC U:J:I: tf. J..ii�� �!f(>�I!/1i'�. ��r:�:iv. ��� ^ �:1 "tf �// : :'1C Virginia preservation Update November 1, 1992 HISTORIC DISTRICT ISSUES FOR THE 90s Questions of due process, conflict resolution, and handicapped acces- sibility are facing architectural review boards, historic district commissions, and preservation organizations throughout Virginia. The Preservation Alliance is help- ing groups address these critical issues through a one -day workshop entitled Historic District Issues for the 90s: A Workshop on Archi- tectural Review. Scheduled for Saturday, November 14, 1992, from 9:30 a.m. until 3:30 p.m. in Fredericksburg, the work- shop includes presentations by speakers as well as extensive audi- ence participation. The day begins with "Your Day In Court: Making Defendable Decisions." In this session, Bobbi Hahn, Executive Director of the Maryland Associa- tion of Historic District Commis- sions, will consider due process and the structure for making deci- sions for an ARB. Planning consultant Elizabeth Waters will follow with "Conflict Resolution: Negotiating Strategies in the Historic District." A former associate at the Center for Environ- mental Negotiation, Ms Waters will help the participants find ways to reach agreements with property owners, applicants to an ARB, and preservationists. The afternoon sessions will focus on issues of handicapped acces- sibility, beginning with "The Americans With Disabilities Act: What Preservationists Should Know" by attorney David H. Bat- taglia. His session will be fol- lowed by an examination of case studies from Virginia. In this final presentation, the audience and a design panel will respond to these real-life issues. The fee for the workshop is $30 for the initial registration and $25 per person for subsequent registra- tions from the same ARB, agency, or organization. Registrations should be submitted by November 11 and can be mailed to the Pres- ervation Alliance of Virginia, Post Office Box 1407, Staunton, VA 24402-1407. For additional infor- iiation, contact the Alliance office at (703) 886-4362. BOND REFERENDA ON NOVEMBER 3RD BALLOT This November 3rd, Virginia vot- ers will have the opportunity to vote for three bond referenda total- ing $613 million. The bonds to finance capital improvements will appear separately on the ballot with $472.4 million for state sup- ported colleges, universities and community colleges; $45.2 million for mental health facilities; and $95.4 million for state parks and natural areas. The Preservation Alliance has joined the Virginians for Progress Foundation in supporting passage of these bonds. Appearing on the ballot as the Parks and Recrea- tional Facil' t Pond, the parks and natura i as package will provide $11.5 million for the ac - PRESERVATION 0 ALLIANCE C F V I R G 11 N I A. Vol. 5, No. 7 quisition of ten natural areas, $26.5 million for four new state parks, and $57.4 million for improve- ments to existing state parks and natural areas. Virginia is the 5th fastest growing state in the country. Each year approximately 45,000 acres of natural lands are converted to resi- dential, industrial, or commercial use. Virginia ranks 47th nationally in state park acreage per capita; studies estimate an additional 8,000 acres of park lands will be needed to meet demand by the year 2000. Virginia is one of only 5 states with a AAA bond rating. Debt service will be paid from the gen- eral revenues of the Common- wealth. With the debt -to -revenue ratios projected, a tax increase is not needed to pay for the bonds. LIVABLE CITIES Individuals interested in the future of our cities may want to attend the 14th Making Cities Livable Conference, scheduled for March 8-12, 1993, in Charleston, South Carolina. Sponsored by the Inter- national Making Cities Livable Council, the conference is designed to allow practitioners and scholars to share insights gained from the experience of some of America's and Europe's most livable cities. Charleston's scale and historic vistas make it an excellent setting for this conference. For informa- tion write to: Suzanne H. Crow- hurst Lennard Ph.D., Organizer, LM.C.L. Conference, P.O. Box 7586, Carmel, CA 93921. Post Office Box 1407 Staunton, VA 24402-1407 (703) 886-4362 FAX: (703) 886-4543 NEWS FROM MEMBER 1993 VIRGINIA PRESERVA- NATIONAL REGISTER ORGANIZATIONS TION CONFERENCE SET PROPERTY OWNERS TO FOR DANVILLE MEET AT LOWER BREMO The negative and photographical holdings of W.E. Lum, Jr. Inc. have been donated to the Peters- burg Museums, City of Peters- burg. The firm was Petersburg's most prominent and prolific 20th century photographic studio. Given by the family, this collection of over 28,000 photographic nega- tives provides a comprehensive view of the City's 20th century history. The Petersburg Museums are seven historic properties owned by the City of Petersburg, includ- ing Blandford Church, Battersea, Centre Hill Mansion, Farmers Bank, McIlwaine House, Siege Museum, and Trapezium House.... W.R. Grace & Company has an- nounced that it will donate all of its interests in more than 1,300 acres of land within the Green Springs Historic District in west- ern Louisa County to Historic Green Springs, Inc. The land has been held for more than 20 years for possible development of a ver- miculite mine .... The Virginia As- sociation of Museums will cele- brate its 25th anniversary in Char- lottesville in 1993. The May 2-4 conference for VAM will focus on "Cultural Democracy." For infor- mation, contact the organization at (804) 367-1079. Our spring workshops have a new name and an expanded format. The 1993 Virginia Preservation Conference will be held in Dan- ville, Virginia on April 15-17, 1993. Our Endangered Historic Properties: A Call to Action is the theme for this year's confer- ence, which will include outstand- ing speakers, on-site workshops, and tours to some of the finest historic sites in southside Virginia and North Carolina. To make your room reservations ($45 single, $55 double), call Howard Johnson's in Danville at 1-804-793-2000. TRANSITIONS Former Alliance intern and staff member Grace Murray Broughton was recently appointed Program Assistant for Technical Services at the National Main Street Center of the National Trust. Congratula- tions to Grace.... Catharine Gilliam has resigned her position as Execu- tive Director of Historic Frede- ricksburg Foundation to coordi- nate the National Trust's response to the property rights movement.... Patricia Zontine of Winchester is the new Virginia representative on the Trust's Board of Advisors. Lower Bremo, a National Historic Landmark in Fluvanna County, will be the site of a first-ever meeting of National Register pro- perty owners in Virginia. Mr. and Mrs. David Wright have opened their home to the Preservation Al- liance, which is hosting this meet- ing and reception. The event is scheduled from 4 p.m. until 7 p.m. on Friday, November 20th. The afternoon will begin with an oppor- tunity for participants to view both Lower Bremo and Bremo. Neil Horstman, Executive Director of Mount Vernon, will be our fea- tured speaker. Our guests will have time for questions and discus- sion, and the evening will end with a reception. Member organizations of the Al- liance should encourage their members who own individually - listed National Register properties to attend. For additional informa- tion, contact the Preservation Al- liance office at (703) 886-4362. ZIP CODE CHANGE The post office recently changed our address. Please note that our new zip code is 24402-1407. Member organizations of the Alliance are encouraged to make copies of Virginia Preservation Update for distribution to staff and board members. ----------------------------------------J�------------------------------------ PRESERVATION oALLIANCE V F V I F, G I N I A 1�n P.O. Box 1407 Vui Staunton, VA 24402-1407 HIST RES ADVISORY -BOARD KRIS C TIERNEY AICP PO BOX 601 WINCHESTER VA 22601 Non -Profit Org. U. S. Postage PAID Staunton, VA Permit No. 10 Basic HRAB Documents I'm enclosing the following documents for handy reference for HRAB members: 1. A copy of the HRAB membership address/phone numbers/term of service list. 2. A copy of pertinent pages of the 1992 County Comprehensive Plan regarding: a. HRAB's function (page 8). b. Action Program Summary (pages 110-113). Note particularly items 7 and 8 under 'Proposed Actions" (page 112) and their relationship to the other items. HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD (AS OF 11/92) The Historic Resources Advisory Board is composed of seven members appointed by the Board of Supervisors. The Board provides information on historic resources to the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission, along with recommendations on general historic resource policy in Frederick County. This Board meets on the third Tuesdav of each month at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Ronald W. Carper (H) 885-14.44 P/C Liaison 408 Sunset Circle Term: 1/15/92 - Cross Junction, Virginia 22625 1/15/93 Mr. Ray E. Ewing (Chairman) (H) 869-1326 Opequon District 5141 Highview Avenue Term: 4/12/91 - Stephens City, Virginia 22655 4/12/93 (2 yr.term) Mr. James Goodrich, Sr. (H) 662-0150 Back Creek District 1984 Cedar Creek Grade (W) 465-3741 Term: 7/12/91 - Winchester, Virginia 22602 7/12/94 (3 vr.term) Ms. Bettye R. Chumiev (H) 869-7211 Member-at-LarUe 473 Vaucluse Road (W) 722-3855 Term: 9/13/92 - Stephens City, Virginia 22655 9/I3/96 (4 yr. Term) Ms. Mary Jane Light (H) 662-4035 Stonewall District (V. Chairman) Term: 3/11/92 - 2973 Woodside Road 3/11/95 ( 3 yr.term) Clearbrook, Virginia 22624 Ms. Judith A. Swiger (H) 667-2596 Member -At -Large 205 Quaker Lane Term: 5/22/91 - Winchester, Virginia 22603 5/22/94 (3 yr.term) Mr. R. Lee Taylor (H) 662-4915 Member -At -Large 801 Amherst Street Term: 5/10/91 - Winchester, Virginia 22601 5/10/94 (3 yr.term) Mr. Gary VanMeter (H) 662-0468 Shawnee District 1544 Airport Road Term: 5/10/91 - Winchester, Virginia 2260? 5/10/94 (3 yr.term) Mr. John E. Venskoske (H) 888-3349 Gainesboro District 193 Myers Lane Term: 04/11/92 - Winchester, Virginia 22603 04/11/93 (1 yr.term) Entrenchments: Nineteenth Corps Line 1864 - 1865 Winter Line There is a need to locate and document all historic structures and sites in the County. Historic preservation methods should be applied to these areas of significance in an effort to protect, enhance and preserve them. In 1988, acting on behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, the Winchester - Frederick County Historical Society applied for and received a Threatened Properties Grant from the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (DHR), together with matching funding from the County. In the first and second phases of the survev, 1,300 sites were documented. A third Threatened Properties Matching Grant was received and phase three of the survey work began in January of 1992. The results of this inventory will bean indispensable foundation for an effective preservation program within the County, providing vital information to aid in the planninz process_ In 1989, the Board of Supervisors established the Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) to provide detailed information on historic resources to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. The HRAB is charged with the following: Developing standards and criteria to be utilized in evaluating what sites are of local historic significance. Using the standards, select particular sites and geographic areas which would be rec- ommended to the Board of Supervisors for recognition as historically significant sites or historic districts. Develop recommendations on additional methods to be used to preserve historic resources. Review particular development proposals and make recommendations to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as to the most appropriate treatment of any historic features contained within the area of the proposal. Develop recommendations on the use of historic resources in association with tourism. economic development and education. Historic sites should not be singled out on the basis of arbitrary decisions, but on established criteria and documentation. Currently, the HRAB is compiling a list of potentially significant sites from those surveyed, based on established criteria. The list is a first step, and consists of those sites which the HBAB will evaluate against more detailed standards in order to begin. recommending sites for recognition as locally significant. ACTION PROGRAM Comprehensive Policy Goals The following is a summary of the comprehensive planning foals set forth for Frederick County: --3 Protect the historic resources in Frederick Countv. Maintain a moderate rate of population growth. Plan for orderly growth and development. Provide for a balanced distribution of population grotivth. Provide for a variety of housing types and locations. Reduce the cost of providing housing and public facilities. Encourage energy efficient housing and housing patterns. Support a business climate conducive to economic activity. Provide support to agriculture as a major industry In the Count-.,. Provide support to travel and tourist related activities. Protect the natural environment from damage due to development activity. Provide for development according to the carrying capacity of the environment. Identify and protect important natural resources. Develop land in accordance with standards that provide for appropriate quality. Confine urban forms of land development to the urban development area. Provide sufficient land in the urban development area. Carefully locate and limit business and industrial areas. Let identified rural community centers serve as service centers. Have separate policies for each rural community center. Aaintain the rural character of areas outside of the urban development area_ 110 Protect the rural environment. Allow larvae scale new communities with appropriate design and an appropriate balance of uses. Provide a safe and efficient road system throughout the Coun .. Coordinate land use planning and decisions with transporration planning. Provide for adequate and safe pedestrian and bigxle travel. Encourage the provision of a full range of transportation options. Provide services and facilities to serve planned land uses and development. Contribute to the needs of the community with parks and recreation. Continue to develop the County's regional parks. Insure that appropriate recreational facilities are provided. Provide recreational programs and activiries. Proposed actions The following describes actions or projects that need to be undertaken to achieve the goals described above. The projects are listed in order of importance. It is not necessariiv the intention that these tasks be completed in this order. Instead. the list is intended to set ge eral priorities and assist in developing annual work programs. 1. Work with State agencies to insure that appropriate methods are in effect for rural sewage disposal along with standards and procedures for approving and monitoring those systems. Investigate the use of small community systems and sanitar districts. 2. Develop an interchange area/corridor plan for the Interstate 81, Interchange 80 - Route 50 East - Route 522 South area, which addresses land use, traffic patterns, and facilities. Develop an interchange area/corridor plan for the Interstate 81, Interchange 81 - Route 7 East area, which addresses land use, traffic patterns, and facilities. 4. Provide incentives to encourage the inclusion of affordable housing in larger scale planned developments. 5. Develop acomprehensive housing plan for the City and County to achieve decent, affordable housing for all. 6. Develop a geographic database for the County which is continuously updated and which can be used to monitor development in the County. 111 --� 7. Develop a comprehensive system for preser-,ing historic sites and battlefields using land dedication and historic districts and use these historic resources to promote tourism and education. ---3 8. Complete the inventory, investigation, and documentation of historic sites and develop methods to protect those sites. Recognize significant sites with plaques and signs. 9. Review provisions and policies for Rural Community Centers. 10. Develop comprehensive watershed management plans for the urban development area to address existing drainage problems and to develop sufficient stormwater management standards for new development. 11. Identify and investigate alternative sources of water supply. Develop methods to protect those sources. v 12. Undertake an effort to establish appropriate rural and urban residential densities based on the carving capacity of the environment, roads, and facilities. Develop information to estimate carrying capacity. Establish density standards which provide a balanced distribution of population growth. 13. Undertake a study to identify the impacts of development on groundwater. 1.1. Develop an interchange area/corridor plan for the Inte-S;ate 81, Interchange 79 - Route 11 South - Route 37 area, which addresses land use, traffic patterns, and facilities. 15. Review and develop procedures and criteria for secondary and primary road plans. 16. Develop an interchange area/corridor plan for the Route 37 - Route 522 North area, which addresses land use, traffic patterns, and facilities. 17. Develop an interchange area/corridor plan for the Route 37 - Route 50 West area, which addresses land use, traffic patterns, and facilities. 18. Develop an interchange area/corridor plan for the Interstate 81, Interchange 82 - Route 11 North - Route 37 area, which addresses land use, traffic patterns, and facilities. 19. Undertake a study of the Albin area for inclusion as a Rural Communitv Center. 20. Studv the public service needs and costs associated with development. Develop methods to identify the impacts of land use decisions on public facilities and services. Accept proffers to address the cost impacts on community facilities. 21. Work with local farmers, agricultural organizations, and agriculturally related businesses to develop economic development strategies in relation to agriculture. 22. Work with the Towns of Stephens City and Middletown to develop plans for land in the Countv surrounding those towns. 112 23. Develop a means to provide limited sewer and water service to the Round Hill and Clearbrook- Bruce town-Stephenson rural community centers. 24. Develop an interchange area/corridor plan for the interstate 81, Interchange 78 - Route 277 area which addresses land use, traffic patterns, and facilities. 25. Prepare a County-wide recreation plan identifying parks and recreation needs and addressing the following: Park, open space, and facility needs in the urban development area Open space and facility standards for new development Rural and rural community center recreation needs Program Needs 26. Design and begin construction of new or renovated County offices 27. Initiate the new enhanced 911 system and undertake a special effort to name roads and number houses to improve emergency response. 28. Review ordinances to allow public review of developr-nent proposals in rural community centers. 29. Study the initiation of a career system for the fire and rescue squads. Continue to support fire and rescue squads and plan to increase support according to development in the various service areas. Develop a plan for new fire and rescue faciiities. 30. Develop an interchange area/corridor plan for the Interstate 81, Interchan,e 83 - Route 672 area which addresses land use, traffic patterns, and facilities. 31. Studv the transit needs of the urban areas in the County. 32. Undertake a study to develop standards to evaluate proposals for new EM, Extractive Manufacturing areas. + 33. Develop an interchange area/corridor plan for the Interstate 81, Interchange 77 - Route 627 area which addresses land use, traffic patterns, and facilities. 34. Develop an interchange area/corridor plan for the Interstate 81, Interchange 84 - Route 669 area which addresses land use, traffic patterns, and facilities. 35. Identify scenic vistas in the County and identify methods to protect those vistas. 36. Review development ordinances to insure that provisions for pedestrian and bicycle travel are made in developments in the urban areas. 37. Review park and ride needs and identify possible locations. 113