A proposal to impose fees on applications for new historic districts in Arlington is drawing criticism from members of the county’s historic-preservation panel.
Kaydee Myers, chair of the Historical Affairs and Landmark Review Board (HALRB), argued that the small number of applications submitted annually would result in minimal revenue, but imposing a fee could dissuade future applicants.
The proposal, made by County Manager Mark Schwartz as part of his fiscal 2027 budget package, “sends a really bad message,” Myers asserted at the HALRB’s March 18 meeting.
“It’s a symbolic message — and I don’t like the message,” she said.
Currently, there is no cost associated with submitting an application for historic status in Arlington. Schwartz’s proposal calls for a fee scale of $250 to $1,000, depending on the number of buildings involved.
The fee would help recover costs of staff time and legal advertising to conduct hearings and provide reports on the properties.
Myers said she has written County Board members expressing concerns, and asked others on the panel to do the same. She also recruited members to speak at budget hearings.
County Board member Julius “JD” Spain, Sr., who serves as liaison to the HALRB, took a middle-ground approach to an ARLnow request for comment.
I take seriously the concerns raised at Wednesday’s meeting about the proposed application fee for Local historic district nominations. Arlington’s historic preservation process depends on people being able to participate in a meaningful way. I understand the concern for this fee, and collectively the Board is reviewing the proposal submitted in the budget.
I also recognize the importance of cost recovery and the staff time involved in processing these applications. I want to better understand the reasoning behind the proposal before drawing firm conclusions. I believe those questions deserve careful consideration.
Some advocates of historical preservation have raised concerns about roadblocks being placed in the way of those efforts, including a staff-driven change in the application process enacted last year.
In response, some advocates for redevelopment — such as the affordable-housing plan by Melwood and Wesley Housing in Aurora Highlands — have argued the historic-designation process is misused in an effort to impede legitimate development plans.
At the March 18 meeting, historic-preservation staff defended the fee proposal, saying other Northern Virginia localities charge fees associated with historic preservation.
Clashes over historic preservation have happened several times in recent years, including over the future of the Febrey-Lothrop mansion (since torn down) and the former Nelly Custis School (currently awaiting resolution). Other applications have involved less controversy, such as creating a local historic district for an Arlingwood home with purported paranormal activity.
HALRB members act as gatekeepers for applications. A negative vote from the panel kills a proposal, such as 2024’s effort to bestow preservation status on a 1970s office building in the Langston Blvd corridor.
A vote by HALRB members to support historic designation sends the matter to the Planning Commission and then the County Board, which has the final say.
In recent years, County Board members have been hesitant to approve historic-district designations unless the property owner concurs. A previous county attorney told Board members that if they did so and the property owner sued, the local government was likely to lose the case.
At the March 18 meeting, HALRB members also objected to a Schwartz proposal eliminating an associate-planner position that supports preservation efforts.
The current historic-preservation staff totals four members, with the planner position being “critical” to operations, one HALRB member said.
