DOCSLIB.ORG

Cover Technical Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cover Technical Report www.ourfuturevb.com It’s Our Future CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH Technical Report Adopted: December 8, 2009 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Table of Contents CITYWIDE Background ........................................................................................... 3 Land Use ............................................................................................... 6 Environment ....................................................................................... 11 Transportation ..................................................................................... 69 Public Facilities .................................................................................. 74 Housing ............................................................................................. 103 Historical/Cultural ............................................................................ 110 Economic Vitality ............................................................................. 118 Tourism ............................................................................................. 127 Military Employment ........................................................................ 132 Agriculture ........................................................................................ 133 PLANNING AREAS Bayfront ............................................................................................ 136 Bayside ............................................................................................. 153 Courthouse/Sandbridge ..................................................................... 172 Great Neck ........................................................................................ 195 Holland ............................................................................................. 212 Kempsville ........................................................................................ 233 Little Neck ........................................................................................ 252 Oceanfront ........................................................................................ 267 Pungo/Blackwater ............................................................................. 285 APPENDIX Natural Heritage Definitions ............................................................. A-1 Bibliography ..................................................................................... A-3 Glossary ............................................................................................ A-4 Southern Rural Area Soils .............................................................. A-15 Planning Commission Design Awards ........................................... A-17 BACKGROUND The City of Virginia Beach is a large, maturing and highly diverse municipality that includes the entire range of urban, suburban and rural areas. Virginia Beach experienced a significant population increase over the last two decades, most of which occurred in the 1980's. A strong economic climate throughout the 1990's, opportunities for housing and employment, the abundance of environmental amenities, and the growth in the military were major factors that contributed to a steady growth rate of the City from 1990 through 2000 and a continued moderate growth rate over the last few years. Virginia Beach is located where the Chesapeake Bay meets the Atlantic Ocean. Our City’s geographic area comprises a total of 307 square miles. The land area consists of 248 square miles with much of the northern sector devoted to more urban uses. The southern part of the City is rural. Inland waterways cover roughly 59 square miles of the City and comprise water, marshes and wetlands that stretch along hundreds of miles of shorelines throughout the areas of the City. Almost 20,000 acres of the inland waterways are owned and controlled by federal and state authorities. In a recognizable way, the relationship between the land and the water defines the City’s physical environment and enhances the quality of life for its citizens and visitors alike. The Green Line was established in 1979. North of the Green Line it is the policy to support growth and urban activity in accordance with this Comprehensive Plan. The Transition Area is planned for low density residential and non- residential uses consistent with the character of that area. The rural area, located south of the Transition area, is planned for agricultural, very low density residential and non-residential uses that reinforce the rural quality of life in that area. It is the policy of the City to restrict public water and sewer service extensions into the rural area. Citywide- Background 3 Land and Water Area Tables Citywide Land Area 248 square miles Water Area 59 square miles Total Area 307 square miles North of the Green Line Land Area 131 square miles Water Area 14 square miles Total Area 145 square miles Transition Area Land Area 16 square miles Water Area < 1 square mile Total Area 17 square miles South of the Transition Area Land Area 100 square miles Water Area 45 square miles Total Area 145 square miles Note: Figures include Planning Areas and Military Inst allations Source: City of Virginia Beach Planning Department Citywide- Background 4 DEMOGRAPHICS The Citywide section summarizes and compares the quantitative data discussed in each of the individual planning areas, and shows how the individual elements come together to describe the City as a whole. Population and Demographic Characteristics 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 Demographic U. S. U.S. City U. S. U.S. Characteristic Census Census Estimate Census Census * Total Population 262,200 393,100 421,500 425,257 431,000 Military Population (%) 18.2% 18.6% NA 13.3% NA Median Household $20,200 $36,700 $43,000 $48,700 $59,000 Income Median Age 26.9 years 28.9 years NA 32.7 34.9 Work Force 110,300 197,500 212,500 213,000 236,000 High School Graduates 80% 88% NA 90% NA College Graduates 22% 25% NA 28% NA (Approx. 8% increase or a net gain of about 3200 people per year between 1990 and 2000) Racial Composition: 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005* White 86.5% 80.5% NA 71.4% 70.2% African American 10.0% 13.9% NA 18.9% 19.0% Asian/Pacific Islander 2.5% 4.3% NA 5.0% 5.5% Hispanic (All races) 2.0% 3.1% NA 4.2% 4.8% Native American 0.2% 0.4% NA .4% .3% Other 0.7% 0.9% NA .1% 1.4% Theoretical Build out to year 2026: 506,000 to 525 people assuming .8 to 1.0% annual growth rate. NA means Not Available Source: U.S. Census - * U.S. Census 2005 American Community Survey (sample size used) Citywide- Background 5 LAND USE LAND USES EXISTING RESIDENTIAL While much of the existing land use in the City represents a low density suburban character, certain defined strategic growth areas located outside established residential neighborhoods are seeing a more compact, mixed-use form of development. The predominant form of residential land uses consist of low to medium density single family dwellings located in the northern and central portions of the City. In the Suburban area, multi- family uses are typically concentrated along several of the City’s main arterials. The citywide ratio of single family and multi family is beginning to change. Over the past few decades, the growth of housing has been dominated by the single family detached unit. The number of single family detached units, as compared to the citywide total of about 170,000 units has hovered around 60% for many years. Since 1996, however, the proportion of single family detached units dropped from 59% to 57% and multifamily units increased from 26% to 28%. While these are slight percentages, they reflect a shift toward more compact development consistent with the city’s comprehensive planning strategy that seeks to reduce sprawl, protect valued natural resources and optimize efficient use of existing infrastructure. Part of the emerging urban residential growth may be seen at the City’s Town Center where about 600 rental and condominium units have been built in the past 7 years. There are approximately 2100 dwelling units in the rural area of the city. EXISTING COMMERCIAL Similarly, while the vast majority of commercial areas of the City remain primarily low intensity, suburban style development, there are defined growth areas that reflect a transformation to a more vertical mix of uses capturing compatible commercial, office, entertainment, and other complementary activities. Within the suburban areas of the City, commercial development varies in size from small scale strip shopping establishments to large malls, with certain design characteristics shared among many establishments regarding roadway frontage, large parking areas, and out parcels which are often devoted to gas stations, convenience stores and fast food restaurants. Much of this commercial development is located at major road intersections and along many of the City’s primary arterials. Major suburban commercial centers located in the City include two regional-scale malls, Lynnhaven Mall (1 million square feet of gross floor area), and Pembroke Mall (600,000 square feet of gross floor area). Several community-sized shopping centers are located around the City at Kemps River Landing (Kempsville), Hilltop (Great Neck), Red Mill Commons (Courthouse- Sandbridge) and several in the Bayside and Bayfront Planning Areas among others. Other community-sized retail centers are at the intersections of the Princess Anne Road and Lynnhaven Parkway, and Lynnhaven Parkway and Salem Road. Citywide- Landuse 6 EXISTING OFFICE Several major office uses and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Vascular Flora of Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge and False Cape State Park, Virginia
    Medical Research Archives The Vascular Flora of Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge and False Cape State Park, Virginia The Vascular Flora of Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge and False Cape State Park, Virginia Richard Stalter* and Eric E. Lamont ** Department of Biological Sciences, St. John's University, Jamaica, NY 11439 New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY 10458 *Corresponding Author Dr. Richard Stalter ( [email protected] ) Copyright 2015 KEI Journals. All rights reserved. Medical Research Archives The Vascular Flora of Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge and False Cape State Park, Virginia ABSTRACT The vascular flora of Bay National Wildlife Refuge and False Cape State Park, Virginia consists of 602 species within 343 genera and 123 families. Of these 519 are native (86%) while 83 are not native to the region. Thirty two species are listed as rare or endangered in Virginia including two small populations of Bartonia verna at False Cape State Park found nowhere else in the state. Several species with southern affinities reach their northern range limit on the Back Bay region, whereas only two northern taxa, Hudsonia tomentosa and Myrica pensylvania are near their southern limit. Non-native varieties of Phragmites australis are a major component of the natural vegetation and pose a threat to native taxa. Each taxonomic entry in the checklist is accompanied by an annotation which includes the locality and habitat in which each taxon occurs, frequence of occurrence, range extensions, rarity status, and pertinent synonyms. Key words : flora, distribution, biodiversity, Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge, False Cape State Park, Virginia. Copyright 2015 KEI Journals.
    [Show full text]
  • REPORT, Balloon Litter in VA 1-4-21 FINAL Final
    MARINE LITTER REPORT January 2021 Deadly Litter: Balloons & Plastic Ribbons on Virginia’s Coastal Beaches Deadliest Type of Trash Latex balloons, foil balloons, plastic ribbons and other attachments on helium-filled balloons are among the deadliest types of ocean trash. Found Everywhere, Especially on Beaches Littered balloons and ribbons can be found inland, but they mostly accumulate in Virginia’s remote coastal environments, between the high tide line and the dune vegetation, which is critical habitat for nesting birds, sea turtles, and diamondback terrapins. Most Common Debris Item on Remote Beaches Balloon debris was the number one or two type of debris found on Virginia’s remote beaches. • Up to 272 pieces of balloon-related litter per mile* • On one beach, 212 pieces of balloon-related litter in a half mile** Data on balloon debris supports the calls for laws, policies and behavior-change campaigns. Photo by Katie Register, CVW significantly more balloons as compared to public Why Study Balloon Litter? beaches. These findings led Clean Virginia Waterways In 2014, 236 volunteers found 904 balloons on (CVW) to partner with the Virginia Aquarium & Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in a Marine Science Center (VAQ) to conduct in-depth three-hour period during the International Coastal research on the fate and accumulation of balloons and Cleanup (ICC) in Virginia. ribbons in coastal environments. Over a period of five years, Virginia’s ICC volunteers Balloon Litter Data from Studies in VA found and reported 4,916 pieces of balloon litter; of A 2014-18 study conducted by the VAQ and CVW these, 3,122 (63.5%) were found on ocean beaches.
    [Show full text]
  • National Wildlife Refuge Visitor Survey 2012: Individual Refuge Results for Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge
    National Wildlife Refuge Visitor Survey 2012: Individual Refuge Results for Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge By Alia M. Dietsch, Natalie R. Sexton, Lynne Koontz, and Shannon J. Conk My children and I had a wonderful time at Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge. A friend told me about the environmental education program offered for children and it far exceeded my expectations. The staff was very knowledgeable and friendly… My 80 year old mother also joined us. She had a ball too. Keep up the good work. — Survey comment from a visitor to Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge. Photo credit: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Contents Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................................... iv Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Organization of Results .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Methods ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Selecting Participating Refuges .................................................................................................................................. 3 Developing the Survey Instrument
    [Show full text]
  • Shoreline Evolution Chesapeake Bay Shoreline City of Norfolk, Virginia
    Shoreline Evolution Chesapeake Bay Shoreline City of Norfolk, Virginia Virginia Institute of Marine Science College of William & Mary Gloucester Point, Virginia 2005 Shoreline Evolution Chesapeake Bay Shoreline City of Norfolk, VA C. Scott Hardaway, Jr. 1 Donna A. Milligan 1 Lyle M. Varnell 2 Christine Wilcox 1 George R. Thomas 1 Travis R. Comer 1 Shoreline Studies Program 1 Department of Physical Sciences and Wetlands Program 2 Center for Coastal Resources Management Virginia Institute of Marine Science College of William & Mary Gloucester Point, Virginia 2005 This project was funded by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality’s Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA17OZ2355 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA or any of its subagencies or DEQ. LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location of the City of Norfolk within the Chesapeake Bay estuarine system...................2 Figure 2. Location of localities in the Dune Act with jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional localities noted. ...2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Figure 3. Geological map of the City of Norfolk (from Mixon et al., 1989). ...........................3 Figure 4. Index of shoreline plates.............................................................4 TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................. i Figure 5. Variability of dune and beach profiles within the City of Norfolk ............................7 Figure 6. Typical profile of a Chesapeake Bay dune system. ........................................7 LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................... i Figure 7. Photo of the Norfolk shoreline showing dune site NF3.. ...................................9 Figure 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Norfolk, Virginia
    Norfolk, Virginia Norfolk, Virginia has a long history with great historical importance. It is the city of my birth, so Norfolk, Virginia is my hometown. I remember as a young child of hearing stories about Norfolk. Today, it is certainly time to show its history and its culture in 2016. It is a city that has the second largest population in any city of Virginia. It has the largest Naval base in the world. It is found in the Elizabeth River, the Chesapeake Bay, and it surrounds the Lafayette River. To the North of Norfolk, we have Newport News, Hampton, Williamsburg, and other locations. To the east of Norfolk lies Virginia Beach. To the south of Norfolk is Chesapeake. Portsmouth and Suffolk is to the west of Norfolk too. All of these locations make up the major cities of Hampton Roads (which is the region that is found in Southeastern Virginia and Northeastern North Carolina). Norfolk is an independent city with many diverse people. It has been through economic issues, racial tensions, and educational problems. Yet, it is still in existence today. As a military oriented city, NATO people, Naval people, Army people, and other people of the military are found here. Numerous neighborhoods in Norfolk (like from Downtown to Norview, Park Place, Ocean View, Berkeley, Olde Huntersville, Park Place, Lamberts Point, Sherwood Forrest, Berkeley, Titus town, Young Park, Coleman Place, Ballentine Place, etc.) go back long decades and centuries. Today, Norfolk is growing and it was founded in 1682. It is the corporate headquarters of Norfolk Southern Railway, which is one of North America’s principal Class I railroads and Maersk Line, Limited (which manages the world’s largest fleet of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Designing the Future of Coastal Virginia Beach Landscape Design and Planning Studio
    DESIGNING THE FUTURE OF COASTAL VIRGINIA BEACH LANDSCAPE DESIGN AND PLANNING STUDIO Landscape Architecture Program School of Architecture + Design Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Dr. Mintai Kim COURSE DESCRIPTION TABLE OF CONTENTS: This book documents the developments in an advanced studio course that enables students to address land- PHASE (1): scape architectural design and planning issues in various contexts and at a range of scales. Course Introduction ..........................................................4 Land planning and design in urban, suburban, and rural environments are a major professional PHASE 2: realm of landscape architects. Informed land planning and design should carefully consider the GIS Analysis for virginia beach ......................................22 impacts of each project on the surrounding wwenvironment. It is essential to understand that macro scale processes that link each project to its larger regional and global context. Responsible planning and design also depends on knowledge of the social needs, historic and cultural values, PHASE 3: political and economical feasibility, and perceptions of the people who are affected by the design Geodesign Workshop......................................................48 and planning activities. PHASE 4: The studio is aimed at providing students with the ability to understand, synthesize and apply Design & Planning...........................................................60 cultural and natural factors and issues on a continuum from a large scale
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 USFWS Eastern B-Pool During Spring, Prior to Draw-Down for Shorebird Feeding
    Chapter 4 USFWS Eastern B-Pool during spring, prior to draw-down for shorebird feeding Management Direction and Implementation • Introduction • Goals, Objectives, and Strategies • Other Management Activities Goals, Objectives, and Strategies Introduction This chapter is in two parts. In combination, the chapter describes the array of management objectives that, in our professional judgement, work best toward achieving the refuge purposes, the vision and goals developed during the planning process, and the goals and objectives of other Service, State and regional conservation plans. We believe in implementing these actions will also effectively address the key issues raised during plan development. The first part, "Goals Objectives an Strategies," describes refuge actions that were developed to achieve specific goals and objectives. The second part, "Other Management Activities", describe refuge actions that were common to all the alternatives in the draft CCP/EA and will be implemented on the refuge Some strategies do not specifically interconnect with any of the seven goals developed for the CCP. For example, the strategies and actions related to cultural, archaeological and historic resources may not fit under habitat or public use goals, but are important nonetheless. Goals, Objectives, and Strategies GOAL 1. Maintain and enhance the biological integrity and diversity of wetland habitats for migratory birds including species of conservation concern. Objective 1a. Manage 906 acres of 13 freshwater impoundments at Back Bay NWR, plus Impoundments- 165 acres of two freshwater impoundments at False Cape State Park, to meet Migrating/Over-wintering the habitat needs of migrating and wintering waterfowl and shorebirds. This Waterfowl and objective shall be aimed at providing quality habitat that maintain or increase Migrating Shorebirds existing levels of migratory waterfowl and shorebird use.
    [Show full text]
  • Class G Tables of Geographic Cutter Numbers: Maps -- by Region Or
    G3862 SOUTHERN STATES. REGIONS, NATURAL G3862 FEATURES, ETC. .C55 Clayton Aquifer .C6 Coasts .E8 Eutaw Aquifer .G8 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway .L6 Louisville and Nashville Railroad 525 G3867 SOUTHEASTERN STATES. REGIONS, NATURAL G3867 FEATURES, ETC. .C5 Chattahoochee River .C8 Cumberland Gap National Historical Park .C85 Cumberland Mountains .F55 Floridan Aquifer .G8 Gulf Islands National Seashore .H5 Hiwassee River .J4 Jefferson National Forest .L5 Little Tennessee River .O8 Overmountain Victory National Historic Trail 526 G3872 SOUTHEAST ATLANTIC STATES. REGIONS, G3872 NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. .B6 Blue Ridge Mountains .C5 Chattooga River .C52 Chattooga River [wild & scenic river] .C6 Coasts .E4 Ellicott Rock Wilderness Area .N4 New River .S3 Sandhills 527 G3882 VIRGINIA. REGIONS, NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. G3882 .A3 Accotink, Lake .A43 Alexanders Island .A44 Alexandria Canal .A46 Amelia Wildlife Management Area .A5 Anna, Lake .A62 Appomattox River .A64 Arlington Boulevard .A66 Arlington Estate .A68 Arlington House, the Robert E. Lee Memorial .A7 Arlington National Cemetery .A8 Ash-Lawn Highland .A85 Assawoman Island .A89 Asylum Creek .B3 Back Bay [VA & NC] .B33 Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge .B35 Baker Island .B37 Barbours Creek Wilderness .B38 Barboursville Basin [geologic basin] .B39 Barcroft, Lake .B395 Battery Cove .B4 Beach Creek .B43 Bear Creek Lake State Park .B44 Beech Forest .B454 Belle Isle [Lancaster County] .B455 Belle Isle [Richmond] .B458 Berkeley Island .B46 Berkeley Plantation .B53 Big Bethel Reservoir .B542 Big Island [Amherst County] .B543 Big Island [Bedford County] .B544 Big Island [Fluvanna County] .B545 Big Island [Gloucester County] .B547 Big Island [New Kent County] .B548 Big Island [Virginia Beach] .B55 Blackwater River .B56 Bluestone River [VA & WV] .B57 Bolling Island .B6 Booker T.
    [Show full text]
  • Balloon Litter on Virginia's Remote Beaches
    Balloon Litter on Virginia’s Remote Beaches Results of Monitoring from 2013 through 2017 A report from Clean Virginia Waterways of Longwood University to the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program for the FY16 Task 94.03 Grant August 2018 Balloon Litter on Virginia’s Remote Beaches: Results of Monitoring from 2013 through 2017 A report from Clean Virginia Waterways of Longwood University to the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program for the FY16 Task 94.03 Grant August 2018 Submitted by: Christina Trapani, Christina Trapani Consulting Kathryn O’Hara, Marine Scientist, Independent Contractor Katie Register, Clean Virginia Waterways of Longwood University With contributions by Leigh Lunsford, PhD, Alex Lee, Gwen Lockhart and Anne Whitehair. of Longwood University This is an accumulative report of all data collected as part of the FY16 grant to Clean Virginia Waterways of Longwood University from the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality through grants from the Office for Coastal Management at NOAA, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. This report includes data that were collected under two previous Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program grants: FY14, Task 95.03 and FY15, Task 95.03. This report also includes data collected in 2013 and 2014 prior to funding support from the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program. Additional support for this research came from Clean Virginia Waterways of Longwood University and in-kind contributions from many partners. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, or any of its sub-agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge DDraftraft CComprehensiveomprehensive CConservationonservation PPlanlan aandnd EEnvironmentalnvironmental AAssessmentssessment MMarcharch 20102010 Front and back covers: Northern pintails USFWS This blue goose, designed by J.N. “Ding” Darling, has become the symbol of the National Wildlife Refuge System. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the principal Federal agency responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fi sh, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefi t of the American people. The Service manages the 150-million acre National Wildlife Refuge System comprised of more than 550 national wildlife refuges and thousands of waterfowl production areas. It also operates 70 national fi sh hatcheries and 81 ecological services fi eld stations. The agency enforces Federal wildlife laws, manages migratory bird populations, restores nationally signifi cant fi sheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, administers the Endangered Species Act, and helps foreign governments with their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Assistance Program which distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes on fi shing and hunting equipment to state wildlife agencies. Comprehensive Conservation Plans provide long term guidance for management decisions and set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes and identify the Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do not constitute a commitment for staffi ng increases, operational and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition.
    [Show full text]
  • F HAMPTON ROADS PROJECT
    f Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Highways r I ENGINEERING REPORT f on HAMPTON ROADS PROJECT I l including RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER BRIDGE GEO. P. COLEMAN MEMORIAL BRIDGE JAMES RIVER BRIDGE SYSTEM AUGUST 1954 L PARSONS, BRINCKERHOFF, HALL 8c: MACDONALD ' I ENGINEERS ISi BROADWAY, NEW YORK 6, N. Y. PARSONS, BRINCKERHOFF, HALL & MACDONALD ENGINEERS FOUNDED BY WILLIAM BARCLAY PARSONS IN 1885 EUGENE L. MACDONALD 5 I BROADWAY, NEW YORK 6, N. Y. CONSULTANTS LAWRENCE S. WATERBURY MAURICE N. QUA DE ..JOHN P. HOGAN WALTER S DOUGL AS w: E. A.COVELL ALF'RED HEDEFINE August 16, 1954 .JOHN O. BICKEL RUSH F. ZIEGENFELDER WILLIAM H. BRUCE, JR. General J. A. Anderson, Commissioner Virginia Department of Highways Richmond 19, Virginia Dear General Anderson: In accordance with your authorization, we have completed the services to be rendered under Stage 1 of our contract for engineer­ ing work in connection with the Hampton Roads Project. These services consist principally of investigations, studies, and the preparation of preliminary plans and estimates of cost of the Pro­ ject. We find that from an engineering viewpoint the construction of the Project as described in the ::i.ccompanying report is entirely feasible and that its estimated cost - exclusive of costs of financing - is $63, 000, 000. Inasmuch as the Hampton Roads Project is one of four toll facili­ ties that will be constructed or, in the case of existing facilities, re­ financed under a proposed new bond issue, we have included in our report pertinent factual data pertaining to the other three facilities. These are the Rappahannock River Bridge, which is a new project, the George P.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places 2005 Weekly Lists
    National Register of Historic Places 2005 Weekly Lists January 7, 2005 ............................................................................................................................................. 3 January 14, 2005 ........................................................................................................................................... 6 January 21, 2005 ........................................................................................................................................... 9 January 28, 2005 ......................................................................................................................................... 12 February 4, 2005 ......................................................................................................................................... 16 February 11, 2005 ....................................................................................................................................... 19 February 18, 2005 ....................................................................................................................................... 22 February 25, 2005 ....................................................................................................................................... 25 March 4, 2005 ............................................................................................................................................. 28 March 11, 2005 ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]