DOCSLIB.ORG

Balls Bluff Battlefield National Historic Landmark

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Balls Bluff Battlefield National Historic Landmark NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK NOMINATION NPS Form 10-900 USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) OMB No. 1024-0018 BALL’S BLUFF BATTLEFIELD HISTORIC DISTRICT Page 1 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form 1. NAME OF PROPERTY Historic Name: Ball’s Bluff Battlefield Historic District Other Name/Site Number: VDHR 253-5021 / 053-0012-0005 2. LOCATION Street & Number: Not for publication: X City/Town: Leesburg, Virginia Vicinity: X State: VA County: Loudoun Code: 107 Zip Code: 20176 3. CLASSIFICATION Ownership of Property Category of Property Private: X Building(s): ___ Public-Local: X District: _X_ Public-State: _ X_ Site: ___ Public-Federal: _X _ Structure: ___ Object: ___ Number of Resources within Property Contributing Noncontributing 5 115 buildings 11 5 sites 8 24 structures 0 7 objects 24 151 Total Number of Contributing Resources Previously Listed in the National Register: 10_ 7: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park Historic District (M : 12-46) 2: Catoctin Rural Historic District (VDHR 053-0012) 1: Murray Hill (VDHR 053-5783) Name of Related Multiple Property Listing: The Civil War in Virginia, 1861 – 1865: Historic and Archaeological Resources. NPS Form 10-900 USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) OMB No. 1024-0018 BALL’S BLUFF BATTLEFIELD HISTORIC DISTRICT Page 2 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form 4. STATE/FEDERAL AGENCY CERTIFICATION As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this ____ nomination ____ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property ____ meets ____ does not meet the National Register Criteria. Signature of Certifying Official Date State or Federal Agency and Bureau In my opinion, the property ____ meets ____ does not meet the National Register criteria. Signature of Commenting or Other Official Date State or Federal Agency and Bureau 5. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this property is: ___ Entered in the National Register ___ Determined eligible for the National Register ___ Determined not eligible for the National Register ___ Removed from the National Register ___ Other (explain): Signature of Keeper Date of Action NPS Form 10-900 USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) OMB No. 1024-0018 BALL’S BLUFF BATTLEFIELD HISTORIC DISTRICT Page 3 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form 6. FUNCTION OR USE Historic: DOMESTIC Sub: Single Dwelling COMMERCE / TRADE Sub: Warehouse FUNERARY Sub: Cemetery AGRICULTURAL / SUBSISTENCE Sub: Agricultural DEFENSE Sub: Fortification Military Facility Battle Site LANDSCAPE Sub: Forest Unoccupied Land Natural Feature TRANSPORTATION Sub: Water-related Road-related Current: DOMESTIC Sub: Single Dwelling FUNERARY Sub: Cemetery RECREATION AND CULTURE Sub: Monument / marker AGRICULTURAL / SUBSISTENCE Sub: Agricultural LANDSCAPE Sub: Park Natural Feature TRANSPORTATION Sub: Road-related Water-related 7. DESCRIPTION ARCHITECTURAL CLASSIFICATION: N/A (Battlefield) MATERIALS: Foundation: Walls: Roof: Other: NPS Form 10-900 USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) OMB No. 1024-0018 BALL’S BLUFF BATTLEFIELD HISTORIC DISTRICT Page 4 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form DESCRIBE PRESENT AND HISTORIC PHYSICAL APPEARANCE Summary Paragraph The Ball’s Bluff Battlefield Historic District is located along a sweeping curve of the Potomac River within Loudoun County, Virginia and Montgomery County, Maryland. Measuring approximately 5.8 miles in length and ranging between 0.4 miles and 1.9 miles in width, the Ball’s Bluff Battlefield Historic District encompasses 3,301 acres, and is comprised of two discontiguous parcels: a primary parcel of 3,291 acres that straddles the Potomac River; and a 10-acre parcel that encompasses the Civil War-era earthwork known as Fort Evans. The Fort Evans parcel is located 1.5 miles east of Leesburg and 550 feet southwest of the main parcel. The historic district is roughly bisected by the broad and eastward turning course of the Potomac River, the west bank of which defines the boundary between Virginia and Maryland. At the time of the Civil War, when the Battle of Ball’s Bluff took place, the river also marked the political and military boundary between the Union and the Confederacy. Within the Ball’s Bluff Battlefield Historic District, much of the Virginia shore is rimmed by a high, rocky escarpment, while the Maryland shore features a wide expanse of level floodplain, edged to the east by bluffs. The Potomac River, as well as the two-mile-long, 395-acre Harrison’s Island located within the bend of the watercourse, are also prominent landscape features of the battlefield that played important roles in structuring military movement and engagement during the battle. To either side of the Potomac River, the battlefield is comprised of terrain, either wooded or cleared, that has changed very little in terms of its essential character since 1861. Along the western margin of the battlefield, however, encroachment of development associated with the nearby Loudon County seat—Leesburg, Virginia— has resulted in the loss of integrity for some areas of the battlefield as defined in 2009 by the American Battlefield Protection Program (ABPP), a division of the National Park Service (NPS).1 These have been excluded from consideration herein so that the historic district retains a high degree of historic integrity, especially integrity of location, feeling, and association, while individual built features possess integrity of design, materials, and workmanship. This National Historic Landmark nomination update, which amends documentation prepared in 1984, addresses a revised spatial and chronological understanding of the Battle of Ball’s Bluff that is based on careful investigation by the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC) in 1993 and by the 2009 ABPP update as well as additional recent scholarship and study. The amended nomination includes a boundary expansion from the 76 acres originally accepted in 1984 to 3,301 acres. The expanded area corresponds, for the most part, with that portion of the 10,436-acre battlefield delineated as Core Battlefield by the ABPP in 2009 that retains a high degree of integrity. Following more recent scholarship, this updated nomination also includes two primary areas of additional Core Battlefield where integrity remains high. The expanded property, as defined herein, is also generally consistent with that identified in a Preliminary Information Form prepared by the Loudoun County Heritage Commission in 2013. This nomination update also clarifies the criteria, period, and areas of significance associated with the battlefield in accordance with current practices. Finally, the nomination also describes the important connection between military tactics, the events of the battle, and the cultural landscape of the battlefield using the KOCOA military terrain analysis process.2 The Ball’s Bluff Battlefield Historic District is nationally significant under National Historic Landmark Criterion 1 in the areas of Politics/Government and Military, during the period October 21–24, 1862. The Battle 1 American Battlefield Protection Program, “Ball’s Bluff (VA006).” Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields, Commonwealth of Virginia, Final Draft (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, July 2009) ), 52– 54. 2 The connection between the terrain and features of the battlefield landscape and the military tactics employed by army commanders has been formalized by U.S. Armed Forces in a military terrain analysis system known as KOCOA. The system is an acronym that stands for K – Key Terrain; O – Observation and Fields of Fire; C – Cover and Concealment; O – Obstacles; and A – Avenues of Approach. NPS Form 10-900 USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) OMB No. 1024-0018 BALL’S BLUFF BATTLEFIELD HISTORIC DISTRICT Page 5 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form of Ball’s Bluff derives its significance from the way it directly influenced military policy for the remainder of the Civil War and beyond. As a result of the Federal defeat at the Battle of Ball’s Bluff, members of the 37th Congress established the Joint Committee on the Conduct of War in early December 1861. While providing itself with broad investigative powers, the Joint Committee focused on examining the causes of four prominent Union military failures during the first year of the war, namely the Battle of Big Bethel First Manassas, the Battle of Wilson’s Creek, and the Battle of Ball’s Bluff. Based on the investigation, the committee worked to influence Union military tactics and operations throughout the remainder of the war. The Ball’s Bluff Battle, which is the most temporally connected to its formation, is considered to have played a key role in convincing Congress to create the Joint Committee on the Conduct of War and the battlefield is the best location for learning about this significant story. The
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Building Stones of Our Nation's Capital
    /h\q AaAjnyjspjopiBs / / \ jouami aqi (O^iqiii^eda . -*' ", - t »&? ?:,'. ..-. BUILDING STONES OF OUR NATION'S CAPITAL The U.S. Geological Survey has prepared this publication as an earth science educational tool and as an aid in understanding the history and physi­ cal development of Washington, D.C., the Nation's Capital. The buildings of our Nation's When choosing a building stone, Capital have been constructed with architects and planners use three char­ rocks from quarries throughout the acteristics to judge a stone's suitabili­ United States and many distant lands. ty. It should be pleasing to the eye; it Each building shows important fea­ should be easy to quarry and work; tures of various stones and the geolog­ and it should be durable. Today it is ic environment in which they were possible to obtain fine building stone formed. from many parts of the world, but the This booklet describes the source early builders of the city had to rely and appearance of many of the stones on materials from nearby sources. It used in building Washington, D.C. A was simply too difficult and expensive map and a walking tour guide are to move heavy materials like stone included to help you discover before the development of modern Washington's building stones on your transportation methods like trains and own. trucks. Ancient granitic rocks Metamorphosed sedimentary""" and volcanic rocks, chiefly schist and metagraywacke Metamorphic and igneous rocks Sand.gravel, and clay of Tertiary and Cretaceous age Drowned ice-age channel now filled with silt and clay Physiographic Provinces and Geologic and Geographic Features of the District of Columbia region.
    [Show full text]
  • Nomination Form Date Entered See Instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type All Entries-Completeapplicable Sections
    OM8 NO. 1024-0018 Expires 30-31-87 United States ~e~artrnentof the Interior National Park Senice Fw NPS only National Register of Historic Places received Inventory-Nomination Form date entered See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries-completeapplicable sections iE-3J, File No. 53-95) and or common same 2 Location street &number E side U,S. Route 15, 3.6 mi. N of kesburq N/A not for publlcatlon cityr town hesbug J vicinity of Virginia code 51 county Imdoun cde 107 Category Ownership Status Present Use -district -publ~c 2occupled -X agriculture -museum .x building@,) 2private -unoccupied -cornmerciaF -park structure -both -work in progress -educational X private residence -site Public Acquisition Accessible -entertainment -religfous object in process X yes: restricted -government -sctentific -being considered -- yes: unrestricted industrial -transportation N/ A 'no -military -other: 4. Owner of Property 1. MT. and Mrs. Hm;y 13. R. Brown name 2- General ard Pss. Bertram G. Harrison 1. Rockland Farm, Route 4, Ebx 75 street & number 2. Route 4 zip rude city, town kesburg vicinity of state Virqinia 22075 5. Location of hegal Description courthause, registry of deeds, ete. budoun County Courthouse street & number 18 E. Market Str~t clty, town Lee sbug state Virginia 2201 2 titre Survey (File N3. 53-96) has this property been determined eligible? -yes no date 1973 1983, 1996 -federal A state -county .tocat -- dewsrtm sunrev Virginia Division of Hi st orlc Landmrks far records ce,town 221 Governor Street, RichmnC state Virginia 23219 Condition Check one Check one -excellent -deteriorated -unaltered -X original site 25good -ruins 2 altered -moved date - N/A -fair -unexposed Describe the present and original (if known) physical appearance SUIWARY DESCRIPTION The Rockland property is a substantial agricultural and residential complex on the Potomac River in northern Loudoun County.
    [Show full text]
  • Auction #129 - Two-Day Sale, March 27Th & 28Th 03/27/2021 9:00 AM EST
    Auction - Auction #129 - Two-Day Sale, March 27th & 28th 03/27/2021 9:00 AM EST Lot Title/Description Lot Title/Description 1 Superb U.S. Remington Model 1863 Percussion Zouave Rifle 4 Fine New England Underhammer Percussion Sporting Rifle .58 caliber, 33" round barrel with a bright perfect bore. While most .30 caliber, 20'' octagon barrel with a very good bore and turned for Zouave rifles remain in fine condition, this example is exceptionally fine. starter at muzzle. This walnut stocked rifle is German silver mounted The barrel retains about 95% original blue finish with the slightest and engraved but oddly is not maker marked. Both David Squier and the amount of light flaking where the blue is starting to mix with a brown man from whom he purchased this rifle, Albert C. Mayer attribute it to patina. The lock and hammer retain 99% brilliant original color David Hilliard of Cornish, NH. It very much Hilliard's style and quality but case-hardened finish. The stock shows 98% of its original oil finish with at the end of the day it stands on its own merits regardless of its maker. nice raised grain feel throughout; both cartouches are very crisp. The The barrel shows areas of light scroll engraving at the breech, center brass patchbox, buttplate, barrel bands and forend tip all show a and muzzle as well as on the top tang of the buttplate. As mentioned it is pleasing mellow patina. The band retaining springs retain nearly all of German silver mounted with its round patchbox showing a very their original blue.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft National Mall Plan / Environmental Impact Statement the National Mall
    THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT DRAFT NATIONAL MALL PLAN / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT THE NATIONAL MALL THE MALL CONTENTS: THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................................... 249 Context for Planning and Development of the National Mall ...................................................................251 1790–1850..................................................................................................................................................251 L’Enfant Plan....................................................................................................................................251 Changes on the National Mall .......................................................................................................252 1850–1900..................................................................................................................................................253 The Downing Plan...........................................................................................................................253 Changes on the National Mall .......................................................................................................253 1900–1950..................................................................................................................................................254 The McMillan Plan..........................................................................................................................254
    [Show full text]
  • Building Stones of the National Mall
    The Geological Society of America Field Guide 40 2015 Building stones of the National Mall Richard A. Livingston Materials Science and Engineering Department, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA Carol A. Grissom Smithsonian Museum Conservation Institute, 4210 Silver Hill Road, Suitland, Maryland 20746, USA Emily M. Aloiz John Milner Associates Preservation, 3200 Lee Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22207, USA ABSTRACT This guide accompanies a walking tour of sites where masonry was employed on or near the National Mall in Washington, D.C. It begins with an overview of the geological setting of the city and development of the Mall. Each federal monument or building on the tour is briefly described, followed by information about its exterior stonework. The focus is on masonry buildings of the Smithsonian Institution, which date from 1847 with the inception of construction for the Smithsonian Castle and continue up to completion of the National Museum of the American Indian in 2004. The building stones on the tour are representative of the development of the Ameri­ can dimension stone industry with respect to geology, quarrying techniques, and style over more than two centuries. Details are provided for locally quarried stones used for the earliest buildings in the capital, including A quia Creek sandstone (U.S. Capitol and Patent Office Building), Seneca Red sandstone (Smithsonian Castle), Cockeysville Marble (Washington Monument), and Piedmont bedrock (lockkeeper's house). Fol­ lowing improvement in the transportation system, buildings and monuments were constructed with stones from other regions, including Shelburne Marble from Ver­ mont, Salem Limestone from Indiana, Holston Limestone from Tennessee, Kasota stone from Minnesota, and a variety of granites from several states.
    [Show full text]
  • Notre Dame Scholastic, Vol. 103, No. 13
    FEBRUARY 23, 1962 rheSCHOLAS --^/Im^iiJ 5 ^•\^::iti^ :\\-v--o^ '-'^^ 1962 Rambler American "400" Four-Door Station Wagon, Superb appointments, 125 HP Overhead Valve Six Performer At A Real @i@D Price Of all 16 U.S. cars that have 6- cars. That's why Ramblers are so §59.50*—and it gives you the cylinder engines standard, only one rattle-free, last so long, feel so solid. economy of a stick shift, too. other gives you so much power- 2. Every Rambler, in addition to per-pound as the Rambler Ameri- The number of advancements in the 13 other rustproofing steps, goes '62 Rambler can make your head can "400". Thai's performance. through a Deep-Dip rustproofing spin—;ef all the prices are lower. You save plenty because Rambler bath—right up to the roof. American prices are the lowest of If you want your money to talk big, 3. Every '62 Rambler has Double- any U.S.-built car—bar none. go talk to your Rambler dealer. Safety Brakes—one system for Thai's value. •Manufacturer's suggested factory-delivered price. front wheels, one for rear—price­ Want to get down to cases? less protection. Self adjusting too. 1. Rambler's all-welded Single-Unit 4. New exclusive E-Stick automatic- ^^AMBLER construction uses almost twice as clutch transmission is yours in any many welds as are used in other 62 Rambler American for only World Standard of Compact Car Excellence ENGINEERS SCIENTISTS IF THE SHOE FITS... then we probably have nothing to offer you now. We like to fill our big- shoe jobs from within.
    [Show full text]
  • Copper Retirement ID No. 2019-01-A-VA
    6929 N. Lakewood Avenue Tulsa, OK 74117 PUBLIC NOTICE OF COPPER RETIREMENT UNDER RULE 51.333 Copper Retirement ID No. 2019-01-A-VA March 20, 2019 Carrier: Verizon Virginia LLC, 22001 Loudon County Parkway, Ashburn, VA 20147 Contact: For additional information on these planned network changes, please contact: Janet Gazlay Martin Director – Network Transformation Verizon Communications 230 W. 36th Street, Room 802 New York, NY 10018 1-844-881-4693 Implementation Date: On or after March 27, 2020 Planned Network Change(s) will occur at specified locations in the following wire center in Virginia. Exhibit A provides the list of addresses associated with the following wire center. Wire Center Address CLLI ANNANDALE 6538 Little River Tpke., Alexandria, VA 22370 ALXNVAAD ALEXANDRIA 1316 Mt. Vernon Ave., Alexandria, VA 22370 ALXNVAAX BARCROFT 4805 King St., Alexandria, VA 22206 ALXNVABA BURGUNDY ROAD 3101 Burgundy Rd., Alexandria, VA 22303 ALXNVABR MOUNT VERNON 8534 Old Mt. Vernon Rd., Alexandria, VA 22309 ALXNVAMV ARLINGTON 1025 N. Irving St., Arlington, VA 22201 ARTNVAAR CRYSTAL CITY 400 S. 11th St., Arlington, VA 22202 ARTNVACY BETHIA 13511 Hull Street Rd., Bethia, VA 23112 BTHIVABT CHESTER 3807 W. Hundred Rd., Chester, VA 23831 CHESVACR CHANCELLOR 1 11940 Cherry Rd., Chancellor, VA 22407 CHNCVAXA CHANCELLOR 2 Rte 673 & Rte 628, Chancellor, VA 22401 CHNCVAXB 957 N. George Washington Hwy., Chesapeake, DEEP CREEK CHSKVADC VA 23323 CULPEPER 502 E. Piedmont St., Culpeper, VA 22701 CLPPVACU CRITTENDEN 409 Battlefield Blvd., Great Bridge, VA 23320 CRTDVAXA DALE CITY 14701 Cloverdale Rd., Dale City, VA 22193 DLCYVAXA Wire Center Address CLLI LEE HILL 4633 Mine Rd., Fredericksburg, VA 22408 FRBGVALH FAIRFAX 10431 Fairfax Blvd., Fairfax, VA 22030 FRFXVAFF BATTLEFIELD 765 Battlefield Blvd., Great Bridge, VA 23320 GRBRVAXB GREAT FALLS 755 Walker Rd., Great Falls, VA 22066 GRFLVAGF GROVETON 2806 Popkins Ln., Groveton, VA 22306 GVTNVAGR DRUMMONDS CORNER 11 Wythe Creek Rd., Hampton, VA 23666 HMPNVADC QUEEN STREET 131 E.
    [Show full text]
  • Figure 1. Sharpshooter Weapons in the American Civil War (Photo Ex
    ASAC_Vol107_02-Carlson_130003.qxd 8/23/13 7:58 PM Page 2 Figure 1. Sharpshooter Weapons in the American Civil War (photo ex. author's collection). 107/2 Reprinted from the American Society of Arms Collectors Bulletin 107:2-28 Additional articles available at http://americansocietyofarmscollectors.org/resources/articles/ ASAC_Vol107_02-Carlson_130003.qxd 8/23/13 7:58 PM Page 3 Sharpshooter Weapons in the American Civil War By Bob Carlson There is a proud tradition of sharpshooting in the mili- tary history of our nation (Figure 1). From the defeat of General Edward Braddock and the use of flank companies of riflemen in the French and Indian War, to the use of long rifles against Ferguson and the death of General Simon Fraser in the Revolutionary War at Saratoga, to the War of 1812 when British General Robert Ross was shot on the way to take Baltimore in 1814 and when long rifles were instru- mental at New Orleans in January 1815, up to the modern wars with the use of such arms as the Accuracy International AX338 sniper rifle, sharpshooters have been crucial in the outcome of battles and campaigns. I wish to dedicate this discussion to a true American patriot, Chris Kyle, a much decorated Navy Seal sniper whom we lost in February of this year, having earned two silver and four bronze stars in four tours of service to his country. He stated that he killed the enemy to save the lives of his comrades and his only regret was those that he could not save. He also aided his fellow attackers at bay; harassing target officers and artillerymen disabled veterans for whom he worked tirelessly with his from a long-range; instilling psychological fear and feelings Heroes Project after returning home.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquia Sandstone in Carlyle House and in Nearby Colonial Virginia by Rosemary Maloney
    Carlyle House August, 2012 D OCENT D ISPATC H Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority Aquia Sandstone in Carlyle House and in Nearby Colonial Virginia By Rosemary Maloney John Carlyle wanted to build an imposing home, and he The source of this tan to light-gray sandstone was wanted to build it of stone, like the great stone houses of familiar to the early settlers of Virginia. A quarry England and Scotland. But comparable stone was not was created there as early as 1650. Today, there available in the Atlantic coastal plain of Virginia. For are still ledges exposed on both sides of Interstate Carlyle the only convenient local source of stone hard 95 near Stafford and along Aquia Creek. This enough for building was the sandstone (or freestone as it stone is suitable for building purposes because of was known in colonial times) from the area around the cementation by silica of its components: Aquia Creek in Stafford County, Virginia, about 35 quartz, sand, and pebbles. But Aquia sandstone miles south of Alexandria. The name Aquia is believed has its flaws. It tends to weather unevenly and to be a corruption of the original Algonquin word therefore is more suitable for interior than exterior “Quiyough,” meaning gulls. construction. Construction of Carlyle House In a letter dated November 12, 1752, to his brother George in England, John Carlyle remarks on the difficulty of building his house in Alexandria. But his frustration is blended with optimism as he writes: “...the Violent Rains we have had this Fall, has hurt the Stone Walls that We Was obliged to Take down A part After it Was nigh its Height, which has been A Loss & great disapointment To me, however Time & patience Will over come all (I am In hopes)...” Apart from this single mention of stone walls, nowhere in the letters to George does John mention Aquia sandstone, or how it was quarried and transported.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Department of Historic Resources PIF Resource Information Sheet
    Virginia Department of Historic Resources PIF Resource Information Sheet This information sheet is designed to provide the Virginia Department of Historic Resources with the necessary data to be able to evaluate the significance of the proposed district for possible listing in the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register of Historic Places. This is not a formal nomination, but a necessary step in determining whether or not the district could be considered eligible for listing. Please take the time to fill in as many fields as possible. A greater number of completed fields will result in a more timely and accurate assessment. Staff assistance is available to answer any questions you have in regards to this form. General Property Information For Staff Use Only DHR ID #: District Name(s): Ball’s Bluff Battlefield Historic District District or Selected October 21-22, 1861 Circa Pre Post Open to the Public? Yes No Building Date(s): Main District Edwards Ferry Road City: Leesburg Zip: 20176 Streets and/or Route 15 Routes: County or Ind. City: Loudoun County & Town of USGS Quad(s): Leesburg, Waterford, Sterling, VA, and Leesburg Poolesville, MD Physical Character of General Surroundings Acreage: 2,870 Setting (choose one): City Urban Town Suburban Rural Transportation Corridor Site Description Notes/Notable Landscape Features/Streetscapes: The proposed district covers portions of Leesburg and Loudoun County, Virginia, and Montgomery County, Maryland. Edwards Ferry Road, the main road, retains its curved and rolling roadbed. The Potomac River, with the strategically significant Harrison’s Island, is the main waterway. The land in the proposed district includes hills, rolling fields and bluffs, all important to the October 1861 battle.
    [Show full text]
  • M a R Y L a N D V I R G I N
    300 ¢ U.S. Coast Pilot 3, Chapter 12 26 SEP 2021 77°20'W 77°W 76°40'W 76°20'W 39°N Annapolis Washington D.C. 12289 Alexandria PISCATAWAY CREEK 38°40'N MARYLAND 12288 MATTAWOMAN CREEK PATUXENT RIVER PORT TOBACCO RIVER NANJEMOY CREEK 12285 WICOMICO 12286 RIVER 38°20'N ST. CLEMENTS BAY UPPER MACHODOC CREEK 12287 MATTOX CREEK POTOMAC RIVER ST. MARYS RIVER POPES CREEK NOMINI BAY YEOCOMICO RIVER Point Lookout COAN RIVER 38°N RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER Smith VIRGINIA Point 12233 Chart Coverage in Coast Pilot 3—Chapter 12 NOAA’s Online Interactive Chart Catalog has complete chart coverage http://www.charts.noaa.gov/InteractiveCatalog/nrnc.shtml 26 SEP 2021 U.S. Coast Pilot 3, Chapter 12 ¢ 301 Chesapeake Bay, Potomac River (1) This chapter describes the Potomac River and the above the mouth; thence the controlling depth through numerous tributaries that empty into it; included are the dredged cuts is about 18 feet to Hains Point. The Coan, St. Marys, Yeocomico, Wicomico and Anacostia channels are maintained at or near project depths. For Rivers. Also described are the ports of Washington, DC, detailed channel information and minimum depths as and Alexandria and several smaller ports and landings on reported by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), these waterways. use NOAA Electronic Navigational Charts. Surveys and (2) channel condition reports are available through a USACE COLREGS Demarcation Lines hydrographic survey website listed in Appendix A. (3) The lines established for Chesapeake Bay are (12) described in 33 CFR 80.510, chapter 2. Anchorages (13) Vessels bound up or down the river anchor anywhere (4) ENCs - US5VA22M, US5VA27M, US5MD41M, near the channel where the bottom is soft; vessels US5MD43M, US5MD44M, US4MD40M, US5MD40M sometimes anchor in Cornfield Harbor or St.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington–Rochambeau Revolutionary Route
    Resource Study & Environmental Assessment WASHINGTON–ROCHAMBEAU REVOLUTIONARY ROUTE Northeast and National Capital Regions National Park Service—U.S. Department of the Interior October 2006 ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT This document is the Resource Study and Environmental Assessment (study/EA) for the Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route. It describes the National Park Service’s preferred approach to preserving and interpreting route resources and one other alternative. The evaluation of potential environmental impacts that may result from imple- mentation of these alternatives is integrated in this document. This study/EA is available for public review for a period of 30 days. During the review period, the National Park Service is accepting comments from interested parties via the Planning, Environment and Public Comment website http://parkplanning.nps.gov/, at public meetings which may be held, and at the address below. At the end of the re- view period, the National Park Service will carefully review all comments and determine whether any changes should be made to the report. No sooner than thirty (30) days from the end of the review period, the National Park Service will prepare and publish a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) to explain which alternative has been selected, and why it will not have any significant environmental impacts. A summary of responses to public comments will be prepared. Factual corrections or additional material submitted by commentators that do not affect the alternative may be incorporated in errata sheets and attached to the study/EA. The study/EA and FONSI will be transmitted to the Secretary of the Interior who will make a recommendation to Congress.
    [Show full text]