Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 2 · column 2 of 7 · from the scan, no model involved
speaking to the assembled members of town government.
Non-syntjietic • ^
Following the inv'efltorjrof' Washington s historic buildings is the real substance of the guidelines, the actual rules governing what types of construction will be acceptable under the new ordinance. In their broad requirements, the new guidelines are very similar to the old ones. Generally, they emphasize the use of traditional building materials over synthetic ,urge property owners not to obscure historic characteristic of their buildings, and emphasise keeping historic buildings in good condition. The difference between these guidelines and those currently used by the Architectural Review Board is their specificity.
For example, there is a section of this draft of the Historic District Guidelines concerning stucco. The guidelines not only explain the undesirable properties of synthetic stucco' substitute “Dryit” but gives a brief history of the substance's manufacture and composition. It is clear that specificity is the focus of this initial draft, intended to assist town government in making decisions that have a clearly defined foundation in the law.
“These guidelines aren't more restrictive, they are more specific about what the ARB is supposed to do,” said Town. Administrator John McCarthy.
Ed Barton, Chairman of the ARB, disagrees. Barton pointed out at the meeting that Washington's ARB is already viewed as too restrictive by many people in Rappahannock County, and that the proposed changes would further this problem.
“I think these rules could be used in [Colonial] Williamsburg and this isn’t Williamsburg,” said Barton.
The history of the
guidelines
The new guidelines are the
94.2%