Changes to the form used to seek historic-district status for Arlington properties may make the process more onerous for applicants.
That was the view of a number of Historical Affairs & Landmark Review Board (HALRB) members, who were informed of the change by staff on Feb. 19 — three months after the revisions went into place.
Most reaction to the changes was unenthusiastic.
The form as rewritten “strikes me as being burdensome to an applicant in a lot of ways,” said HARLB member and former chair Richard Woodruff.
He was among several HALRB members who said a number of the new filing requirements imposed on applicants should be downgraded to optional.
Particularly irksome to several board members is the new requirement that those proposing a local historic district meet with county historic-preservation staff before an application can be accepted.
“I really don’t like that,” HALRB chair Kaydee Myers said.
Before an application gets to the HALRB, staff must deem the submission complete. One HALRB member expressed fears that staff or other members of county government might “slow-roll” attempts to set up a meeting in the future.
“It gives the county a way to stop someone from filing an application,” a board member said.
Another requirement that drew complaints: Insisting that applicants make a visit to the Charlie Clark Center for Local History at Arlington Central Library, even if their applications did not require research there.
Receiving less but still some criticism was the requirement that an applicant explain in detail whether the property meets any or all of the 11 criteria that determine whether historic-district status is warranted.
Properties are required to meet at least two of the 11 in order to be considered. Past practice has been for HALRB members to review the submission, and use that to determine what criteria are and are not met.
Staff have 45 days from the filing of an application to either make the determination that an application is complete, or send the paperwork back to the applicant with a request for more information. Only after an application is determined to be complete does it flow to HALRB members.
At the Feb. 19 meeting, county staff acknowledged that the new requirements could result in “potentially a more arduous task” for applicants.
But, they said, the new rules would help to get more thorough applications, taking some of the burden of staff and HALRB members.
Not every member of the advisory panel reacted negatively to the changes.
“I don’t think it’s a burden,” board member Joan Lawrence said of the new requirements.
Others were open to a middle ground, making the new requirements optional rather than mandatory while letting applicants know it was in their best interest to follow the recommendations.
“I totally like the guidance idea,” Myers said.
In addition to feedback from HALRB members, the new requirements drew flak from a leading historic-preservation advocate.
Historic-preservation staff “should be bending over backwards to make the application process easier, appealing, more attractive — not more obtuse, more difficult, more burdensome,” Tom Dickinson of Save Arlington History told ARLnow.
Echoing a number of HALRB members, Dickinson suggested that amending some of the new requirements to make them merely strong suggestions could remove many concerns.
At the meeting, HALRB members made several attempts to get staff to consider revamping the changes. Staff members replied that the impact of the changes, if any, would be evaluated in coming months.
“What I’m hearing you say is, this is a done deal,” Woodruff said after his request for a second look was rebuffed.
Arlington’s local historic district process requires most applications to be vetted by the HALRB, which after receiving the submission holds an initial hearing and determines whether historic-preservation staff should conduct a thorough evaluation.
The resulting review typically takes months to complete. After that, the application returns to the HALRB for a public hearing and vote.
Approval at that stage sends the matter to the Planning Commission and County Board for final action; a negative vote by HALRB members kills the proposal.
The only exception to the procedure is for properties owned or ground-leased by Arlington Public Schools. In those cases, the review bypasses the HALRB process and goes directly to the County Board.
That exception came to be after a battle over historic designation for Dorothy Hamm Middle School, which formerly served as Stratford Junior High School and the H-B Woodlawn Secondary Program.
Parents and school leaders voiced concerns that historic designation for the building, which played a key role in Virginia’s school integration battles of the late 1950s, would imperil renovation and expansion efforts.
The new application-form language recommends, but does not require, that applicants who do not own the targeted parcel meet with the property owner before submitting the request.
Currently, there are 42 local historic districts in Arlington, ranging from single buildings to the entire Maywood neighborhood. On average, about one application is evaluated each year.
Currently, staff is conducting an evaluation of a proposal to designate the former Nelly Custis Elementary School in Aurora Highlands as a local historic district. That could complicate the recently approved rezoning of the site enabling Melwood and Wesley Housing to raze the century-old building and redevelop the parcel.
Being placed in a local historic district imposes a number of restrictions on property owners. For properties in a local historic district, exterior changes must be approved by HALRB members (or staff, when the alterations are limited in scope).
It is difficult — though not impossible — to raze an existing property covered by the designation.
Being in a local historic district is different from having a property included in the National Register of Historic Places and Virginia Landmarks Register, which are merely honorific designations and place no restrictions on property owners.
Arlington has a large number of properties that are in the national and state historic registers but have not been created local historic districts.
