|
SECTION J -- COMMUNITY PLANNING, HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PROGRAM MISSION: To identify, document and inspect historically significant
architectural, archeological and cultural resources in Arlington County and
strive to preserve, promote and protect those resources.
The program mission is achieved
through a variety of program activities including planning, resource
identification, design review for designated properties, district designation
and technical assistance to homeowners on renovations relating to increased
participation in the federal and state tax credit programs. For the first time in the history of the
program, a Historic Preservation Plan is being developed and will be adopted as
a component of the County's comprehensive plan. Plan implementation will commence in FY 2006 and will focus on
increasing public awareness and support, integrating preservation values into
land use and other policies and practices, and protecting priority
resources. The on-going Countywide
Historic Resources Survey is near completion and staff will continue the
analysis and evaluation of historical, architectural and cultural resources in
order to make appropriate recommendations for designation, preservation and
interpretation. Work on new
nominations to the National Register of Historic Places will continue as will
the development of text and installation of historic markers. Additionally, in FY 2006, staff will develop
updated publications on preservation activity and increase presentations to
neighborhood groups on preservation.
The staff supports the Historic Affairs and Landmark Review Board.
|
Historic
Preservation
|
|
FY 2004
|
FY 2005
|
FY 2006
|
% Change:
|
|
Actual
|
Adopted
|
Proposed
|
'05 to '06
|
|
Personnel
|
$277,660
|
$281,027
|
$293,898
|
5%
|
|
Non-Personnel
|
162,386
|
109,910
|
109,910
|
-
|
|
Total Expenditures
|
440,046
|
390,937
|
403,808
|
3%
|
|
Total Revenues
|
12,500
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
Net Tax Support
|
$427,546
|
$390,937
|
$403,808
|
3%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized FTEs
|
4.0
|
4.0
|
4.0
|
|
|
Funded FTEs
|
4.0
|
4.0
|
4.0
|
|
SIGNIFICANT BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS:
-
An increase in personnel costs ($12,871) reflects
normal salary and benefits adjustments and the reclassification (upgrade) of a
planner position.
-
Revenue received in FY 2004 was a one-time reimbursement
from the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, for the Certified Local
Government (CLG) Grant Program, for
historic preservation funds allocated and paid.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES:
|
FY 2002 Actual
|
FY 2003 Actual
|
FY 2004 Actual
|
FY 2005 Estimate
|
FY 2006 Estimate
|
FY2006
Goal
|
|
Mission Outcomes Measures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sites locally designated as historic
landmarks *
|
313
|
313
|
313
|
314
|
314
|
315
|
|
Cumulative/Percentage of County historic resources surveyed
|
5,726/60%
|
6,305/70%
|
7,415/80%
|
8,415/89%
|
9,415/100%
|
9,415/100%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effectiveness
Measures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monthly inspections completed/ Percent in compliance **
|
1,181/80%
|
1,181/80%
|
1,181/80%
|
1,182/80%
|
1,182/90%
|
1,183/90%
|
|
Ratio of pickups to complaints for code
enforcement cases ***
|
3.8
|
4.6
|
1.5
|
3.0
|
3.5
|
4.0
|
|
COA applications/Percent approved
|
50/95%
|
50/95%
|
60/95%
|
60/98%
|
60/98%
|
60/98%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer Service
Measures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
favorable responses from applicants on satisfaction with COA process
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
85%
|
90%
|
95%
|
95%
|
|
Percent of
favorable responses from applicants on satisfaction with tax credit
assistance
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
88%
|
90%
|
95%
|
95%
|
|
Percent of
favorable responses from HALRB members
on satisfaction with program support
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
70%
|
75%
|
80%
|
80%
|
* Numbers reflect a correction to earlier figures given for
number of locally designated sites over time.
** Each single-property district (25 in total) is inspected each
month, while multiple-property districts (Maywood, Buckingham, and Colonial
Village) require 4 inspections per month.
Number reflects all properties in each multiple-property district.
Numbers for years prior to FY2004 are corrections to earlier figures.
*** This number is calculated by
dividing the number of pickups (violations identified by the inspector during
systematic inspections) by the number of citizen complaints. Its intent is to
indicate the extent to which code enforcement is done proactively. Pickup
rate is affected by workload demands for the inspector – a lower number of
pickups in 2004 reflects work on other program priorities.
FUTURE BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS:
-
Completion of the resource survey, additional district
and landmark designations, completion and implementation of a historic
preservation plan, development of priority criteria to evaluate those historic
resources identified in the resource survey, and growing support for National
Register Listings and tax credit projects will put additional pressure on
limited staff resources.
|
