2007-12-03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4 the National Register should move forward. She said it was originally scheduled to be reviewed by the Department of Historic Resources in June of 2007,but the neighborhood did not support it and Council asked that it be deferred. She said that the state notifies the neighborhood about the nomination, holds a public meeting, then reviews the application at one of their quarterly meetings. She said obvious errors were corrected in the application. She said concerns by the neighborhood include that there is no oral history included, and that such a designation might increase property values and encourage gentrification. She said there were also objections about the proposed boundary of the district. She said that oral histories are not generally included in such applications. She said that national designation allows for tax credits to be taken for renovations. She said local designation would require review by the Board of Architectural Review. She said the revised document is on the City’s website and notices of the public hearing were sent to neighborhood. She said she has received one objection and one support of the nomination. Ms. Scala said that ideally there are both state and local designations to protect the neighborhood. Responding to a question from Ms. Hamilton, Ms. Scala said that the state does not want non-contributing structures at the edge of a district included, and noted that those properties could be reviewed in the context of an entrance corridor. She said Oak Street could be cut out and added to the Ridge Street district, but the report would have to be rewritten justifying such action. She said that is more of a logistical and funding issue. Ms. Hamilton said that the neighborhood was concerned that national and state designation would be used to support a conservation district in the neighborhood. Ms. Scala said she was upfront with the neighborhood that staff would like to pursue a conservation district in the future, but the neighborhood found that very confusing. Responding to a question from Dr. Brown, Ms. Scala said that a conservation district would required a separate process and a public hearing and approval by Council. Dr. Brown asked if national designation requires permission to paint, add on to a building, or demolish a building, or if there would be any review process, and Ms. Scala said no unless tax credits were sought. Responding to a question from Mr. Lynch, Ms. Scala said that if VDOT wanted to build a road through a nationally designated district there would be an additional review required. The public hearing was opened. Ms. Ann Carter, 715 Orangedale Avenue, said that at first she was in favor of the historic designation and believes in historic preservation, but she remains opposed to architectural design control for the Fifeville neighborhood. She said coupling the national and state and local designation was confusing to the neighborhood. She said she hopes that the national and state designation will not be used in the future to pursue a local designation. She said she hopes that her name is not included in the nomination. Ms. Antoinette Roades, 406 Oak Street, said this item should not even be on the agenda. She said there is wide opposition, and the nomination is a flawed product of a flawed process. She said it has not been revised and fundamental flaws remain. She said the nomination has been plagiarized from her letter. She said her work is not the City’s to use, and feels the use of it is unethical. She said Fifeville-Castle Hill is not an historic district, it is a toxic waste site. Ms. Jane Covington, owner of 513 Dice Street, said she restored the house last year in hopes of getting tax credits. She said she supports the national designation, but not a conservation district, and said she is glad the two have been decoupled. As there were no further speakers, the public hearing was closed.