Laserfiche WebLink
EXHIBIT B <br />Prepared Fehruary 23, 1998 <br />SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS FOR CHAPTERS 1, 3, AND 4 OF THE <br />PROPOSED HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES <br />CHAPTER 1: "BEFORE YOU BEGIN YOUR PROJECT" <br />Pages 6 & 7 — Remove the "Peyton Building" and the "Stacy Building" from the "contributing" <br />category on the maps and make both "noncontributing" properties. <br />Page 6 — In the middle of the page, strike the words "appropriateness of the" and add the underlined <br />phrase so that the paragraph reads: <br />The approprimeness o.fthe overall condition and aesthetic quality of the site or <br />structure enhance the existing design control district. <br />Explanation: The word "appropriateness" in this context offers no guidance to anyone. Our <br />suggested new phrase is a different way of defining "contributing". <br />Page 7 — The sixth bullet should read: <br />• 2Wake sHre Encourage the design of new development to relates to any adjoining <br />neighborhoods. <br />Explanation: While the concept of having transitional areas represents a sound planning concept, <br />the tool to bring about this notion is not, in our opinion, an historic district overlay zone, at least not <br />under Virginia's enabling legislation. Furthermore, trying to mold an historic structure so that it fits <br />better with a less significant structure outside of the historic district may be getting it backwards. <br />Page 7 — Near the bottom under the definition of "contributing" properties, strike the second <br />sentence which reads: <br />Explanation: The first half of the sentence duplicates the preceding sentence. The second half is <br />garbled and could not mean what is written. <br />• Page 7 — At the end of the page where "noncontributing" is defined, add the phrase underlined below <br />so that the entire sentence reads: <br />