DOCSLIB.ORG

Shpo Project Effect

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shpo Project Effect APPENDIX E3 SHPO PROJECT EFFECT 801 E. Main Street, Suite 1000 Richmond, VA 23219 June 20, 2018 Mr. Marc Holma Division of Review and Compliance Department of Historic Resources 2801 Kensington Avenue Richmond, Virginia 23221 RE: Project Effect Southeast High Speed Rail (DC2RVA) Project, Washington, D.C. to Richmond Segment DHR #2014-0666 Dear Marc, The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) are continuing environmental studies associated with the Tier II Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Washington, D.C. to Richmond segment of the Southeast High Speed Rail (DC2RVA) corridor (Project). The limits of the Project extend from Control Point RO (MP CFP-110) in Arlington south to the CSX Transportation (“CSXT”) A-Line/CSXT-S-Line junction at MP A-11 in Centralia, Virginia (Chesterfield County), a distance of approximately 123 miles. This project is receiving federal funding through the FRA, will traverse federal land including parcels owned by the U.S. Marine Corps and the National Park Service, and will require permits to be issued by federal agencies such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Due to the involvement of these and other federal entities, the undertaking requires compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), as amended. The FRA sent your office a project initiation letter on December 11, 2014, formally commencing the Section 106 process, and the project’s area of potential effects (APE) was approved by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO; the Virginia Department of Historic Resources [DHR]) on February 2, 2015, as required by 36 CFR 800.4(a)(1). HISTORIC PROPERTIES Reconnaissance architectural studies and archaeological survey on the majority of the corridor and Project alternatives were coordinated with your office between 2015 and 2017. In the fall of 2017, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was produced and a Preferred Alternative was recommended by DRPT and the Commonwealth Transportation Board in December 2017. Subsequent technical studies were completed in spring 2018 to ensure that all areas within the APE were the subject of cultural resource studies; the results of this work were coordinated with your office through several Page 1 801 E. Main Street, Suite 1000 Richmond, VA 23219 meetings and reports. A full roster of all reports is included as Appendix A. Based on the project background reviews, technical studies, and previous coordination with your office, DRPT has determined that there are 118 historic properties in the APE (Appendix B). Of these, 58 are buildings, 32 are historic districts (including those that comprise structural elements such as railroads), 5 are structures, 12 are archaeological sites, 10 are battlefields, and 1 is a multicomponent resource that contains all resource types. With regard to archaeological historic properties, most of the sites have been identified at the Phase I level but none have been the subject of Phase II-level evaluation testing as part of the current study. DRPT has elected to assume eligibility on all sites. DHR concurred with this approach during a meeting on July 26, 2017, and via email on July 31, 2017. RESOURCE EFFECT RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with 36 CFR 800.5(a), DRPT has applied the criteria of adverse effect to these 118 properties. The regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act define an effect as an “alteration to the characteristics of a historic property qualifying it for inclusion in or eligible for the National Register” [36 CFR 800.16(i)]. The effect is adverse when the alteration of a qualifying characteristic occurs in a “manner that would diminish the integrity of the property’s location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association” [36 CFR 800.5(a)]. This letter presents effect recommendations for the 118 historic properties, followed by an overall project effect recommendation. The effect recommendations listed below were discussed with DHR at an in-person meeting on June 19, 2018, and this letter reflects all comments provided by your agency at that time. Maps of resources have been presented in the 20+ technical reports produced as part of this project; as such, maps showing resource locations are not repeated here. Adverse Effect Based on an evaluation of the project design, construction, and operations, DRPT recommends a finding of adverse effect on 14 above-ground resources and 9 archaeological sites. Resources where an adverse effect could occur are listed below from north to south. Richmond, Fredericksburg, and Potomac Railroad (RF&P) (500-0001): The historic rail corridor includes the main rail line, spurs, and associated elements such as station houses, bridges, and other structures. The DC2RVA project will require the replacement of several contributing elements to this rail district (such as the bridge over Naomi Road [089-0080] and numerous culverts) and construction of new bridges adjacent to extant contributing resources (such as the Bridge over the Occoquan River [500- 0001-0022, see more below]). The removal of these contributing elements to the linear district would diminish the characteristics that render this resource eligible for the NRHP. Page 2 801 E. Main Street, Suite 1000 Richmond, VA 23219 RF&P Bridge over Occoquan River (500-0001-0022): This resource is a through-truss, camelback railroad bridge constructed in 1915. It is both individually eligible for the NRHP and a contributing element to the RF&P Railroad. Current plans include constructing a second bridge directly east of the existing span, thus introducing a new element adjacent to the current bridge. The project has the potential to diminish the property’s integrity of design, setting, materials, feeling, and association through the introduction of this large new element. Rippon Lodge (076-0023): One of the oldest houses in Prince William County, the vista from Rippon Lodge looking down Neabsco Creek (and current site of the railroad and associated bridge) was documented by Benjamin Latrobe in the late-eighteenth century. The waterway viewshed is a character- defining feature of this significant resource. A new railroad bridge across Neabsco Creek will be built as part of this project. The new bridge will be west of the existing span and will be a new primary element within the viewshed from Rippon Lodge, thus impacting a significant element of the property. Civil War Campsite (44ST1223): The rail corridor was an extremely important component of transportation logistics associated with the Civil War, and war-related resources were often located near the tracks. This site represents one of many Union army winter encampments in the area, occupied during the winter of 1862–1863. The addition of a new set of tracks will require disturbances to the subsurface matrix within the site, thus potentially destroying data-bearing strata that contribute to the site’s eligibility. Rappahannock River Railroad Bridge and Associated Structures/Platform (111-0132-0025): This 1927 multiple-span, open-spandrel, concrete arch bridge was built across the Rappahannock River in 1927 when the rail tracks in Fredericksburg were elevated to allow for vehicular traffic below. The system also includes a series of rail structural supports and the passenger platform to the west, built at the same time. This structure is both individually eligible and a contributing element to both the RF&P Railroad (500-0001) and the Fredericksburg Historic District (111-0132). Proposed modifications include the construction of a new bridge immediately south of the existing span and changes to the structural supports and rail platform. These alterations will diminish the resource’s integrity of design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Marye’s Mill Site (44SP1087): The site represents the remains of a large mill, located on the banks of the Rappahannock River, which was in operation during the second half of the nineteenth and first decades of the twentieth centuries. It is a prominent visual element in many Civil War-era representations of Fredericksburg. Construction associated with rail modifications and construction of a new bridge spanning the river will result in subsurface disturbances throughout the majority of the site, thus adversely affecting the data potential of this resource. Page 3 801 E. Main Street, Suite 1000 Richmond, VA 23219 Fredericksburg Historic District (111-0132): This 200-acre district comprises the city’s historic core and includes hundreds of residential, commercial, educational, ecclesiastic, and industrial buildings. Current project plans include the construction of a multi-story parking deck to the south of the extant rail tracks and construction of a new rail station to the north of the tracks. In addition, contributing elements to the district, such as the Rappahannock River Bridge and rail structural system listed above, will be modified during the work. The new structures will introduce new large-scale elements to the district, and other building and structural changes will diminish character-defining features of the district. Block 49/Train Station (44SP0688) and Block 48/Train Station (44SP0687): These two archaeological sites comprise two city blocks in Fredericksburg, stretching from Sophia Street on the east to Princess Anne Street on the west and bounded by Lafayette Street on the north and Frederick
Load more

Recommended publications
  • National Register of Historic Places Weekly Lists for 1995
    United States Department of the Interior NATIONAL PARK SERVICE P.O. Box 37127 ·washington, D.C. 20013-7127 I~ REPLY REFER TO: The Director of the National Park Service is pleased to inform you that the following properties have been entered in the National Register of Historic Places. For further information call 202/343-9542. JAN 6 1995 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 12/26/94 THROUGH 12/30/94'· KEY: State, County, Property Name, Address/Boundary, City, Vicinity, Reference Number NHL Status, Action, Date, Multiple Name ARIZONA, YAVAPAI COUNTY, Fleury's Addition Historic District, Roughly, Western and Gurley from Willow to Grove, and Willow, Garden and Grove, from Western to Gurley, Prescott vicinity, 94001488, NOMINATION, 12/27/94 (Prescott MRA) CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Lanterman House, 4420 Encinas Dr., La Canada Flintridge, 94001504, NOMINATION, 12/29/94 CALIFORNIA, MONTEREY COUNTY, Pacific Biological Laboratories, 800 Cannery Row, Monterey, 94001498, NOMINATION, 12/29/94 CALIFORNIA, ORANGE COUNTY,. Huntington Beach Elementary School Gymnasium and Plunge, 1600 Palm Ave., Huntington Beach, 94001499, NOMINATION, 12/29/94 CALIFORNIA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, Smiley Park Historic District, Roughly bounded by Brookside Ave., Cajon St., Cypress Ave. ami Buena Vista St., Redlands, 94001487, NOMINATION, 12/29/94 CALIFORNIA, SAN MATEO COUNTY, Brittan, Nathanial. Party House, 125 Dale Ave., San Carlos, 94001500, NOMINATION, 12/29/94 CALIFORNIA, SONOMA COUNTY, Rosenburg's Department Store, 700 Fourth St., Santa Rosa, 94001497, NOMINATION, 12/29/94 CALIFORNIA, STANISLAUS COUNTY, Hotel Covell, 1023 J St., Modesto, 94001501, NOMINATION, 12/29/94 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE EQUIVALENT, Carnegie Institution of Washington.
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Improvement Program
    FY2021-25 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 21PROGRAM CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2021-FY2025 Chesterfield County, VA 1 FY2021 – FY2025 CIP Executive Summary FY2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overview Chesterfield County, in accordance with state code and the County Charter, prepares a five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP, revised annually, is a long-term planning tool that guides the design, financing, construction, and maintenance of public infrastructure. In addition, the CIP forecasts any operating costs associated with each project. Upon adoption of the CIP, funds are appropriated for the first year of the plan. The funds shown in years two through five of the plan are included for planning purposes and are reevaluated and appropriated with the adoption of each respective fiscal year’s budget. The County’s CIP is divided into three main project categories: General Government, Schools, and Utilities. The general government category includes functions like public safety, transportation, parks, and libraries. The Schools section highlights projects within the Chesterfield County Public School System, while the Utilities category provides details on capital investments to the County’s water and wastewater infrastructure. FY2021 – FY2025 Program Highlights • The FY2021-2025 CIP evolved from a $352.7 million five-year plan in mid-March to a $331.7 million plan at adoption due to the strategic measures taken to reduce spending County-wide as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The reductions occurred in year one of the plan as the County reduced pay-as-you- go funding and shifted programmed referendum funding to future years. • The CIP maintains a targeted focus on the care and maintenance of existing infrastructure and the communities they support.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Capital Improvement Program FY2018-FY2022
    Proposed Capital Improvement Program FY2018-FY2022 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service Blank CHESTERFIELD COUNTY Board of Supervisors Dorothy Jaeckle Leslie Haley Chairman Vice Chairman Bermuda District Midlothian District Christopher Winslow James “Jim” M. Holland Stephen Elswick Clover Hill District Dale District Matoaca District STRATEGIC GOALS Model for excellence in government Safety and security Economic prosperity and educational excellence Healthy living and well-being Thriving communities and environmental stewardship Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1 Composition of the Capital Improvement Program ................................................................................ 12 General Government Capital Improvement Program............................................................................. 13 County CIP Summary............................................................................................................................... 14 General Government Airport Airport Runway Extension....................................................................................................................... 19 Airport Fuel Farm .................................................................................................................................... 20 Libraries Enon and Ettrick Library Expansion Study..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Archeological Investigations of Site 44CF7, Falling Creek Ironworks and Vicinity, Chesterfield County Virginia
    ARCBlAEOLOGICAL INVl3STIGATIONS OF SITE 44CF7, FALLI1MG CREEK my CHESTEmLD COUNTY, VIRGINIA Virginia Department of Historic Resources Survey and Planning Report Series No. 4 Prepared by: William and Mary Center for Archaeological Research Department of Anthropology The College of William and Mary Williamsburg , Virginia 23 187 Project Directors Donald W. Linebaugh Dennis B. Blanton Authors Thomas F. Higgins I11 Charles M. Downing Donald W. Linebaugh Antony F. Opperman E. Randolph Turner I11 The preparation of Archaeolo~icalInvestigations of Site 44CF7. Falling Creek Iron Works.. was financed in part with federal funds from the U. S. Department of the Interior, through the Department of Historic Resources, Commonwealth of Virginia. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the U. S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin or handicap in its federally assisted programs. If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program or activity described herein, or if you desire further information, please write to: Office of Equal Opportunity, U. S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D. C. 20240. The contents and opinions of this book do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of the Interior, nor does any mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation by the Department of the Interior. The Virginia Department of Historic Resources, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, will make this publication available in braille, large print or audio tape upon request. Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 8:HISTORICAL and CULTURAL RESOURCES Overview a Brief History of Chesterfield County
    CHAPTER 8: HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES Overview Chesterfield County enjoys the distinction of being an area with one of the longest periods of continuous habitation in the country. In looking towards the future, it is important to understand, and to appropriately preserve and promote the county’s rich historical and cultural foundation. Not only can students experience hands-on learning at these historic sites, but Chesterfield County can also increase local business development through tourism. DESIRED OUTCOMES OF THIS CHAPTER: • Preservation of Historic Places and Structures • Leverage Historic Assets to Create a Sense of Place and Foster Tourism • Support Partnerships and Private Preservation of Historic Resources • Utilize Historic Places for Events, Education and Other Unique Experiences A Brief History of Chesterfield County The county was originally inhabited by the Appamatuck Tribe, one of many tribes ruled by Chief Wahasonacock. In 1611, Sir Thomas Dale led a group of colonists from the original English settlement at Jamestown to the “Citie of Henricus” located on Farrar’s Island. In 1613, Dale seized various lands around the area where John Rolfe cultivated a salable variety of tobacco for English export for the Virginia Company of London. Tobacco became the colony’s main export and source of revenue. In 1619, the first iron furnace, and one of the first industrial developments in America, was established on Falling Creek near the James River. Other early American accomplishments included private property ownership, beginning of public education and experiments in representative government. In March 1622, Chief Wahasonacock’s successor, Chief Opechancanough, launched a coordinated attack on area settlements, many of which never recovered and were abandoned.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Rivers Plan
    2017 REGIONAL RIVERS PLAN PhPhototo CrCrededitit: JoJohnh Henenleley A Plan for the Richmond Region 3 01/ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Th is plan fulfi lls the James River Regional Plan strategy, one of Westham Fund of Th e Community Foundation, and Th e four strategies presented to Th e Capital Region Collaborative by Cameron Foundation and guidance from the local governments Bill Street, Chairman of the James River Work Group, on April of the Richmond Region. 26, 2013. Th e plan is the work of the James River Association and Richmond Regional Planning District Commission with Additional gratitude is extended to the Crater Planning assistance from consultants of Timmons Group and 3north. District Commission, Friends of the Lower Appomattox River (FOLAR), federal and state agencies, organizations, Th e creation of this plan would not have been possible without and individuals who contributed knowledge, expertise, and the generous support of Altria, WestRock Foundation, Custis guidance throughout the creation of the plan. It is imperative 4 for the region to have a plan to help guide the various uses of the James, Appomattox, Chickahominy, and Pamunkey Rivers. Regional Rivers Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS 5 06/REGIONAL 01/ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS 3 44 02/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 07/LOCALITY 6 RECOMMENDATIONS 58 03/INTRODUCTION 9 08/CONNECTIONS 78 PART I: EXISTING CONDITIONS 04/EXISTING CONDITIONS 14 09/STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION 80 PART II: VISION, RECOMMENDATIONS, & IMPLEMENTATION 05/VISION 10/CONCLUSION 43 88 APPENDIX A: PLANS AND STUDIES 90 02/ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 02/ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Th e James River, “America’s Founding River,” has defi ned Richmond throughout its history.
    [Show full text]
  • Chesterfield County, Virginia
    Chesterfield County, Virginia Biennial Financial Plan, FY2009 and FY2010 FY2010 Amendments Capital Improvement Program, FY2010-FY2014 Plus a sixth planned year, FY2015 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to Chesterfield County for its biennial budget for the biennium beginning July 1, 2008. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan and as a communication device. The award is valid for a period of two years only. We believe our current budget continues to conform to program requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY Board of Supervisors Arthur S. Warren Daniel A. Gecker Chairman Vice Chairman Clover Hill District Midlothian District Dorothy Jaeckle James “Jim” M. Holland Marleen K. Durfee Bermuda District Dale District Matoaca District STRATEGIC GOALS To be exemplary stewards of the public trust and a model for excellence in government To provide world-class customer service To be known for extraordinary quality of life To be the safest and most secure community To be the employer of choice To be the FIRST CHOICE business community To be responsible protectors of the environment Chesterfield County, Virginia VISION Our vision is to be the recognized leader in government, the standard by which others measure their progress and success. Every employee has a personal devotion to excellence in public service and embraces the highest standards of ethics and integrity.
    [Show full text]
  • English Mineral Exploration in the New World
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2005 English Mineral Exploration in the New World Lisa L. Heuvel College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Heuvel, Lisa L., "English Mineral Exploration in the New World" (2005). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626476. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-zes1-0v72 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ENGLISH MINERAL EXPLORATION IN THE NEW WORLD A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the American Studies Program The College of William and Mary In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Lisa Liberati Heuvel 2005 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Lisa Liberati Heuvel Approved by the Committee, April 2005 Chandos Michael Brown, Chair James Axtell Barbara AT. Carson /f C. ^Berquist, Geologist Virginia Division of Mineral Resources DEDICATION This project is dedicated with love to my husband Jan for his support and to my family (Sean and Katey Heuvel, Jean and Gene Liberati, Sandy and Dick Swift, and Lisa Swift Rose) for their encouragement. They often heard more they ever expected to about mineral exploration, and believed.
    [Show full text]
  • SEHSR Richmond, VA, to Raleigh, NC
    SEHSR Richmond, VA, to Raleigh, NC 10 INDEX AND ACRONYMS 10.1 INDEX Topic Section No. Acronyms 10.2 Advisory Committee Meetings 7.1.2 Agencies/Persons Provided with Statement 6 Agency Coordination and Public Involvement 7 Agency/Local Comments and Responses 8.1 Agency Scoping Meetings 7.1.1 Agency Specific Coordination 7.1.3 Air Quality 3.6, 4.6 Affected Environment 3.6.2 Construction Impacts 4.6.6 Highway Vehicle Operations – CO 4.6.3 Highway Vehicle Operations – MSATs 4.6.5 Highway Vehicle Operations –PM2.5 4.6.4 Locomotive Operations: CO, NOx, HC, PM 4.6.1 Locomotive Operations: MSATs 4.6.2 Regulatory Setting 3.6.1 Summary 4.6.7 Updated Project Need Data 1.8.5 Affected Environment (Air) 3.6.2 Ambient Air Quality in the Study Area 3.6.2.1 Existing Ambient Pollutant Concentrations 3.6.2.2 Agriculture 3.11.2.2 Alberta, VA Emergency Services 4.11.3.3 Environmental Justice 4.11.5.2 Transportation Network Impacts 4.11.2.2 Alternatives Considered But Not Carried Forward 2.3 Abandoned S-Line from Centralia to Lynch 2.3.1 SEHSR Richmond, VA, to Raleigh, NC 10-1 Tier II Final EIS, August 2015 SEHSR Richmond, VA, to Raleigh, NC Topic Section No. Alternatives Serving Old Union Station 2.3.3 S-line from Appomattox River to Burgess 2.3.2 Aquatic Communities 3.10.1.2, 4.10.1.2 Archeological and Historical Resources 3.12, 4.12 Archaeological Resources 3.12.1, 4.12.1 Historical Resources 3.12.2, 4.12.2 Local Landmarks 3.12.3 Summary and Mitigation 4.12.3 Archaeological Resources 3.12.1, 4.12.1 Arrowfield Plantation 3.12.1.9, 4.12.1.8 Battersea 3.12.1.11,
    [Show full text]
  • Ten Months of Terror the Campaign That Ended the Civil War
    TEN MONTHS OF TERROR The Campaign That Ended The Civil War Chesterfield County • Colonial heights • dinwiddie County hopewell • petersburg • prinCe george County Virginia www.petersburgarea.org For 292 days in 1864 and 1865 some 125,000 visitors descended on the Petersburg Region. These guests arrived on foot and horse- 1861 and the spring of 1864, suffering back, in wagons, and onboard steamers, with runaway inflation and a crippling dressed in military uniforms of blue, gray, shortage of the necessities of life. But and butternut. They came in May of that year, a Union army from Texas and Maine; from landed at City Point (now a part of Illinois and Florida; and Hopewell) and Bermuda Hundred they made a mess. (in Chesterfield County), triggering a series of battles known as the One hundred and fifty Bermuda Hundred campaign. A years later, the impact of month later their visit still resonates the largest throughout the Petersburg armies in Virginia, Region both physically and commanded by psychologically. The Civil War Robert E. Lee and is inescapable in our corner Ulysses S. Grant, of Virginia and today’s began a contest Petersburg Region’s travelers are invited to for control of battlefields, museums, share with us a heritage Petersburg that and historic homes. that helps define us all as would extend Contemporary visitors Americans today. from mid-June can explore the scenes 1864 through of Petersburg’s most In 1861, Petersburg was April 2, 1865. important battles, such the second largest city in When Petersburg surrendered to as the Crater, Fort Stedman, and Five Virginia and the seventh largest Union forces the following day, war’s end Forks, at Petersburg National Battlefield.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
    NPS Form jD-900 OMB No. 10024-0018 (oct. 19901 United Stah Department of tha Intdor National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form Thi form is tor urn In m~nuvlgor rmwating dotennineticas tor ~ndnridualp+rs md -ria. instructans in hbw dP ftm R.garrPr ol HmPt.ore mfianFcnn (Nm.1 Ragisor Bulbtin 1~).Comp(ae arch im by mulung "x" in tt~mropnrtl box or by entering mbmution rquutrrb. It m item dam not to baing enter "NIA lor "not WOkYW.'' For tuKUar# anhit.Qun) c&f&fimtion. mstwlk ud UOM of agnificmm, mMr only magorim and w~~ tmm the InaffuaiOnS. badd- emnm and Mrratnm n.mr on aminu8Wn shoats (NPS Form 108001). use r mer.worn pmcamx. or canprrcu, to wmpW. clN bms. other narnedsite number 44CF7 2. Location street 8 number not for publication city or town Richmond I3 vicinity state Virginia ~odgVA county Chesterfield 041 ap code 23297 3. StaWFedeml Agency cammuon ~n my op~lion,me pmyQ mma Ci w not meat the NU'^ Ra@Mrcrfimm. (Ca continuatim stmt tor WMOW comments.) Si~natureot cenrlylng oftici.Vr~ Dare StateorF~aIaearcyMdbu~ 4. Natloml Park Sewiir Certification I hereby csnity tnar the property is: SiaMum of the Kwwr Oate of Actlon 0 emu$ In me National Register. LI See cont~nusliqlsheet. a detrrrnmed dlgible tor the NatfonJ Reg~stw C %a antlnuatmn sheet. rn i; dslrrmtned not elig~bhtor th Nahonrl Reg~ster. rmowd hwn the National Falling Creek Ironworks Archaeological Site (44CF7) Chesterfield, Virginia Namo of Pfopwy County .nd SIIU 5. cla8dfbtlOn chmenhlp of Plop.rty c"wm of P- Number ot Resouma withln Prow (Checlc
    [Show full text]
  • Touching Base
    TOUCHING BASE Volume 2, Issue 9 March 10, 2017 FALLING CREEK IRONWORKS PARK On March 8, Norma Corbin of the Falling Creek Ironworks This issue Foundation met with Parks and Recreation Director, Dr. James Dodd Park at Point of Rocks 2 Worsley and Chief of Construction and Design, Stuart Connock to PRAC 3 discuss development, programs, funding sources, historical Planning Commission Tours 4‐5 significance and future opportunities at Falling Creek Park Tour with County 6‐7 Ironworks Parks. Administrator SALT 8‐9 VRPS Management 10‐11 Conference History 12 Ettrick Community Building 13 Bensley Community 14 Building Henricus Historical Park 15‐16 Parks 17‐19 We have job openings. Check out the current listing and look for more opportunities year‐round. http:// www.chesterfield.gov/ Careers/ Page 2 TOUCHING BASE DODD PARK AT POINT OF ROCKS Nice weather = busy parks Bermuda District PRAC member, Cathy Cheely spoke of Dodd Park at the PRAC meeting on March 2. She commented how crowded the trails have been with the nice weather we have had. Thank you Cathy for the pictures! Volume 2, Issue 9 Page 3 PRAC PRAC, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, was held March 2 at the Community Development Building with all 11 members of the Commission present. Front Row: Cathy Cheely, Bermuda District; Bob Terrell, Dale District; Raymond Marsh, Matoaca District; Shayne McDavid, Vice Chair, Clover Hill District; Brenda White, Chair, Bermuda District; Mary Ellin Arch, Clover Hill District Back Row: Earnest Harris, Dale District; Robert McCurry, Midlothian District; David Glass, School Board Representative; James Worsley, Parks and Recreation Director; John Simpson, Midlothian District; Bruce Clayton, Matoaca District.
    [Show full text]