Loading...
HRAB 02-18-14 Meeting MinutesFrederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) February 18, 2014 Board of Supervisors Executive Session Room of the County Administrative Building 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA Members Present: Lauren Murphy, Elizabeth Fravel, Mary Turner, Denny Perry, Stacey Yost, Chris Oldham , Gary Oates, Maral Kalbian Members Absent: Claus Bader, Clint Jones, David O’Neil Staff Present: Candice Perkins Applicants Present: Gary Oates on behalf of the McCann Slaughter Family Agenda Items: December 2013 Minutes, 2014 Meeting Dates, CPPA Application for the McCann Slaughter Properties Call to order at 6:30 PM. Item 1: May 2013 - minutes approved with two changes. Item 2: Meeting dates were acknowledged. Item 3: Continued Discussion from the December 2013 meeting on the CPPA Application for the McCann Slaughter Properties. The applicant discussed a small commercial area in addition to the OM Land Use Designation (OM) somewhere along the new road. The representative from SVBF was not aware of the changes; he stated that the foundation feels that this is a very important property because it contains core area for the second and third battlefields. The Foundation currently holds easements on the nearby Shockey property (with a battery from second Winchester). He further stated that in 2005 they approached the family and asked permission to do an appraisal so they could make an offer. They offered an easement and a fee simple purchase and the appraised value was not accepted by the owner. They have not been in touch with them since. The foundation would like to acquire the property or an easement and would offer fair market price as an offer. The SVBF would be in contact with the family and hopefully pursue an offer. It's an important part of the two battlefields that the foundations already own parts of. During the Third Winchester, there was a Calvary mass rode down the corridor. They took over Fort Collier and Star Fort and then swept the confederate forces away. One of the largest Calvary masses occurred at Stephenson’s Depot. It was questioned whether Route 37 would impact the viability of the site? North of Cedar Creek Battlefield there isn't a lot of land that has retained its integrity. This property and some sites south of Redbud Road are pretty much all that's left of Third Winchester that hasn't lost its integrity. The Foundation tries not to buy isolated properties. He further stated that view shed protection is part of what they also look at and that value is higher if the property is adjacent to an already protected site. This property is already impacted by the presence of the railroad. At one time the foundation was also looking at some other properties along McCanns Road. From the Civil War and colonial standpoint this property is a gem. He further addressed the Shockey five acre lots, which they were working with them back in 2009 but that didn’t work out; t hings haven't worked out in the northern part of the County as the foundation had hoped. It's all open land now and one person can pull the pin out and cause the entire area to potentially develop. If the property is developed, it should be buffered as much as possible. The HRAB then discussed the trails proposed in the CPPA application, and questioned the purpose and value of them. Within battlefields, you are there to see the landscape as it was at that time. The Snowden Bridge type trails are recreation and have no historical value. It's more of an intrusion, not protection of the area. Who would want to walk around an industrial park other than employees? The HRAB also noted that with Greystone they didn't provide any trails, and this development would provide connections. It wouldn't be historic, but a connectio n. The HRAB was torn with this application. They were not happy with removing the DSA from a core area of two battlefields. They felt that there wasn’t much guidance from the existing text for what the current plan calls for. What does the DSA actually mean? The Comprehensive Plan said to develop the UDA, but the Comprehensive Plan also states the need to preserve battlefield. The HRAB stated that the plan should leave the DSA in one area and show the remainder as OM designation and that text is needed to describe how the property should be developed. There was a battlefield preservation plan done in 1999 that focused on the area south of Redbud Road. The County has looked at some preservation and did a good plan at that time. When looking at the SVBF maps online, this property was more important with the second than the third. The applicant pointed out that Stephenson Depot isn't actually on this property; it's a little north on the Cutshaw property. Buffer should be on the floodplain area and t he front corner of the site. The HRAB stated that they can't fix the issue that there isn't text that goes with the plan. The DSA became a catch all for all uses, and it's not defined. The HRAB discussed whether the property could be developed sensitively. It appeared that the County doesn't want to show both uses (DSA and OM), because it could possibly be manipulated. The HRAB still would like to see both uses on the property and have text that supports it. Retain the DSA along the floodplain and historic area and show the remainder as OM designation. Hopefully and easement can be established on the reminder.  Motion was presented to preserve the DSA on the area west and north of the stream, the rest is fine for changing the zoning. The limits would be the floodplain area as defined. The motion fails. The HRAB discussed an approach to not remove the DSA at all. It's an area that has two core areas and the Comprehensive Plan states to preserve these areas. The purpose of the HRAB is to support historic preservation. If the CPPC supports the changed land use, then they can decide differently. Personal feeling is not to remove the DSA. There is policy that supports the preservation. Second preference would be a sensitive development.  A second motion was presented to recommend denial of the CPPA, this motion was seconded and approved. The HRAB felt they had insufficient information to support the request and that the Comprehensive Plan supports the preservation of battlefields. The property in the past was already determined to be important by the initial designation as DSA. It's core, it's important. Other comments: It's not the job to figure out what sensitive develop ment is. The HRAB needs to focus on the historic element of the property. The HRAB was concerned about the text that would be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors since it would not come back before the HRAB. This site is very cutoff from the rest of the battlefield. Since he doesn't have the historic details, we can't make a decision. If we keep going like this, we keep chipping away at the battlefield. It is very difficult to tell from the maps, when it comes to battlefield unless you do archeology. It 's the collection of what is left of the collection of properties. Unlike historic sites you can look at and determine the integrity, battlefields are a more fluid endeavor. It is the collective value of what is left. Who should the burden of proffer be on, the HRAB or the applicant? We have been requiring more information with recent applicants. This is a historic landscape, but the burden should fall on the HRAB/County. Meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.