DOCSLIB.ORG

FAIRFAX BOULEVARD MASTER PLAN Was Created By

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

FAIRFAX BO ULEVARD MASTER PLAN DRAFT May 11, 2007 FAIRFAX BOULEVARD MASTER PLAN was created by: Dover, Kohl & Partners town planning Victor Dover Joseph Kohl Margaret Flippen James Dougherty Amy Groves Canan Mutlu Andrew Zitofsky Mayor Robert F. Lederer Jason King Fairfax Boulevard Partnership Pamela Stacy Board of Directors Fairfax City Council Kara Wilbur John E. Napolitano, Chairman Councilmember Joan W. Cross Amin Amanullah, Circle Sunoco Service Station Councilmember Jeffrey C. Greenfield Ferrell Madden Associates Cosmos Bells, P. J. Skidoo’s Restaurant Councilmember Gail C. Lyon form-based coding Gardner Britt, Ted Britt Ford Councilmember Gary J. Rasmussen Geoffrey Ferrell Kevin Farrish, Farrish Auto Dealerships Councilmember R. Scott Silverthorne Mary Madden Forrest Higginbotham, Real Estate Investor Councilmember Patrice M. Winter Kathleen McKay, McKay Chevrolet Urban Advisors Joe Ricciardi, Dolce Vita & Sfizi Restaurants economic analysis City of Fairfax Planning Commission George Stone, Real Estate Investor Edward Starkie Paul Cunningham, Chair Charles Stringfellow, Brown Automotive Glenn Kellogg Gerald Fitzgerald, Vice Chair Andrea Sylos-Labini, Real Estate Investor David Berenbaum Hall Planning & Engineering Richard Szymczyk, Fairfax Racquet Club K. Habib Khan transportation planning David Hilton Wise, Lewis & Roberts, Attorneys Cathy Pumphrey Rick Hall Reta Wood, Shear Strands, Salon and Spa William G. Foster, Jr. Terry Simmons New Urban Waterworks Travesky Associates environmental planning Marie Travesky, President City of Fairfax Economic Development Authority Milt Rhodes Denise Nugent, Vice President Jamie Breme, Senior Associate City of Fairfax Staff UrbanAdvantage Bob Sisson, City Manager computer visualizations David Hudson, Planning Director Steve Price Jack Blevins, Planning Division Chief Geoff Durham, Economic Development Manager ArxSolutions Eric Forman, Planner computer animations and Hundreds of Fairfax Residents Dan Malouff, Planner Gonzalo Navarro Patricio Navarro Jose Ignacio Zuccarelli Paula Lopez DRAFT May 11, 2007 FAIRFAX BOULEVARD MASTER PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Research & Analysis 1 Creating the Plan 2 First Principles 3 Special Places 4 Transportation Analysis 5 Economic Analysis 6 Implementation 7 Appendix A Draft Form-Based Code Appendix B Using GIS for Economic Development Appendix C Detailed Synchro and Sidra Analysis TABLE OF CONTENTS DRAFT May 11, 2007 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Why a Plan? • Support a mix of uses & destinations: shared vision for the future of the Boulevard which Fairfax Boulevard has the opportunity to become a The corridor should support not just retailing, details specific design solutions and a feasible model for corridor redevelopment. Its current con- car dealerships and hotels, but also housing, implementation strategy. dition as a road that caters to pass-through traffic, workplaces, green spaces, and civic uses; a mix rather than the needs of the local community does of uses is essential to conquering transportation Transportation not enhance Fairfax’s overall character. problems. Engineers recognized a fundamental tension between the need to move large volumes of traffic This plan is a comprehensive strategy for growth • Balance traffic capacity, safety & character: and the desire to create a walkable environment and redevelopment of the corridor; it seeks to Fairfax Boulevard can be transformed into an and 'great street'; the plan calls for balancing this improve the safety and operational efficiency for urban street address that is conducive to a wider tension by incorporating classic multi-way boule- all modes of travel, while creating a more economi- variety of economically productive uses instead vard concepts for Fairfax Boulevard. A conceptual cally productive address. The plan envisions that of the narrow mix of a typical suburban strip; design is included. A modern roundabout is rec- Fairfax Boulevard can be more than just improved; this can be accomplished within an engineering ommended for Fairfax Circle and other intersection it can be one of the most memorable streets in strategy that builds capacity and improves safety. improvements at Northfax and Kamp Washington America. are included. A street map indicates how to shape • Plan for feasible, phase-able pieces: the thoroughfare network as redevelopment occurs. How was this plan created? Complete transformation of the corridor will not “Designing in public”, the team of planners, en- happen overnight, so the plan is designed to be Implementation gineers, architects, and economists conducted an broken down into small components that can be The plan lays out a series of steps to be undertaken open planning process in March 2007 to identify redeveloped as the market demands. to realize the vision. First among these is adopting the ideas, needs and concerns of the community; a Form-Based Code. over 500 interested residents and stakeholders • Enable the market: participated. Promoting a variety of new uses will generate The Implementation section of the plan spells out significant economic return and a memorable future planning tasks, promotional tasks, and a FIRST PRINCIPLES OF THIS PLAN place that can be enjoyed by the Fairfax resi- series of funding mechanisms for public capital dents and visitors. improvements and private development. • Make the Boulevard a ‘great walkable street’: Fairfax Boulevard should be rebuilt according to Economics a design that would transform the corridor into The economic health of the Boulevard is critical FIRST PRINCIPLES a community asset. The goal is to create a safe to maintaining the City’s quality of life and fiscal • Make the Boulevard a ‘great walkable street’ and attractive street enhanced by trees while self-sufficiency. While the Boulevard is an active balancing the needs of pedestrians and motor- commercial street, the corridor is often seen as a • Allow change on the community’s terms, ists. declining asset. Fairfax Boulevard is an aging strip- controlling size & scale commercial corridor which fails to compete with • Support a mix of uses & destinations • Allow change on the community’s terms, control- the new development located just outside of the ling size & scale: City limits. Due to this decline in competitiveness, • Balance traffic capacity, safety & character Future development needs to respect the com- the City realized the need for a plan to guide re- • Plan for feasible, phase-able pieces munity's overall vision for the corridor. Revising development efforts and to bolster the Boulevard’s the existing land development regulations and position within the regional economy. The result- • Enable the market building with a form-based focus would be the ing Fairfax Boulevard Master Plan represents a best way to realize this vision. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DRAFT May 11, 2007 research & analysis 1 DRAFT May 11, 2007 "Fairfax Boulevard is our economic and service corridor in the City." – Mayor Robert Lederer March 24, 2007, Hands-on Design Session I-66 Lee Highway Fairfax Boulevard is one of the most visible and ec- onomically significant thoroughfares in the Wash- ington, D.C. metro region. Located in the City of Fairfax, the Boulevard is home to a variety of retail, Fairfax Boulevard office, and auto-related establishments. The City Chain Bridge Road relies on the Boulevard as its main commercial core, but also as a primary source of real estate Jermantown Road revenue. The economic health of the Boulevard is critical to maintaining the City’s quality of life and fiscal self-sufficiency. A diversified economy within the City, and the success of the Boulevard, helps to lessen the tax burden on residents. While the Boulevard is an active commercial street, the corridor is often seen as a declining asset. Fair- Fairfax Boulevard fax Boulevard is an aging strip-commercial corridor which fails to compete with the new development Business Improvement District located just outside of the City limits. Due to this Aerial view of the study area decline in competitiveness, the City realized the need for a plan to guide redevelopment efforts Fairfax Boulevard Analysis and to bolster the Boulevard’s position within the The study area defined for the Fairfax Boulevard Fairfax Boulevard is 3½ miles long. The Boulevard regional economy. The resulting Fairfax Boulevard Master Plan includes the entire Route 50 (Fairfax and its surrounding properties contain today over Master Plan represents a shared vision for the fu- Boulevard) corridor within the City of Fairfax. 120 retail stores, over 30 personal service estab- ture of the Boulevard which details specific design Route 29 and Route 50 become one as they enter lishments, two dozen auto dealerships, 18 multi- solutions and a feasible implementation strategy. the City from the east, splitting back into two tenant office buildings, and scores of other uses. streets (Fairfax Boulevard, Route 50 and Lee High- In total, approximately 300 parcels exist along the In March 2007 the City and citizens of Fairfax, way, Route 29) at the Kamp Washington intersec- Boulevard, accounting for 449 acres of land (not along with the town planning firm of Dover, Kohl & tion. The study area is bound by Pickett Road to including rights-of-way, such as roads). Partners, gathered to create a plan for the redevel- the east and Jermantown Road to the west. The opment of the Boulevard. The planning process north and south limits of the study area extend The thorough examination of background infor- began with a review of previous planning efforts, approximately
Recommended publications
  • A History of Residential Development, Planning, and Zoning in Arlington County, Virginia

    A History of Residential Development, Planning, and Zoning in Arlington County, Virginia

    A History of Residential Development, Planning, and Zoning in Arlington County, Virginia April 2020 Acknowledgements This report would not have been possible without the guidance and feedback from Arlington County staff, including Mr. Russell Danao-Schroeder, Ms. Kellie Brown, Mr. Timothy Murphy, and Mr. Richard Tucker. We appreciate your time and insights. Prepared by Dr. Shelley Mastran Jennifer Burch Melissa Cameron Randy Cole Maggie Cooper Andrew De Luca Jose Delcid Dinah Girma Owain James Lynda Ramirez-Blust Noah Solomon Alex Wilkerson Madeline Youngren Cover Image Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/arlingtonva/29032004740/in/album-72157672142122411/ i Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................................................................ i Prepared by ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... i Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................................................................. ii Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................................... iii Key Findings ...............................................................................................................................................................................................
  • SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATING and FINANCIAL DATA for the Quarter Ended September 30, 2014

    SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATING and FINANCIAL DATA for the Quarter Ended September 30, 2014

    SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATING AND FINANCIAL DATA For the Quarter Ended September 30, 2014 INDEX Page Investor Information 2 2014 Business Developments 3 - 5 Common Shares Data 6 Financial Highlights 7 Funds From Operations 8 - 9 Funds Available for Distribution 10 Net Income / EBITDA (Consolidated and by Segment) 11 - 16 EBITDA by Segment and Region 17 Consolidated Balance Sheets 18 Capital Structure 19 Debt Analysis 20 - 22 Unconsolidated Joint Ventures 23 - 25 Square Footage 26 Top 30 Tenants 27 Lease Expirations 28 - 30 Leasing Activity 31 - 32 Occupancy, Same Store EBITDA and Residential Statistics 33 Capital Expenditures 34 - 38 Development Costs and Construction in Progress 39 Property Table 40 - 57 Certain statements contained herein constitute forward-looking statements as such term is defined in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance. They represent our intentions, plans, expectations and beliefs and are subject to numerous assumptions, risks and uncertainties. Our future results, financial condition and business may differ materially from those expressed in these forward- looking statements. You can find many of these statements by looking for words such as “approximates,” “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” “intends,” “plans,” “would,” “may” or other similar expressions in this supplemental package. Many of the factors that will determine the outcome of these and our other forward-looking statements are beyond our ability to control or predict. For further discussion of factors that could materially affect the outcome of our forward-looking statements, see “Item 1A.
  • Rosslyn Multi-Modal Transportation Study

    Rosslyn Multi-Modal Transportation Study

    Rosslyn Multi-Modal Transportation Study September 2012 – FINAL DRAFT Arlington County DES – Transportation Planning Photo: Courtesy of Rosslyn BID Ross Table of Contents Executive Summary I. Study Overview II. Development and Travel Demand Forecast III. Existing Conditions and Preliminary Recommendations: Chapter A. - Rosslyn Streets Chapter B. – Transit in Rosslyn Chapter C. – Walking in Rosslyn Chapter D. – Bicycling in Rosslyn Chapter E. – Rosslyn Parking and Curb Space Management Chapter F. – Transportation Demand Management IV. Summary of Transportation Recommendations List of Related Studies and Plans This study was written during the summer of 2011, by staff from the Arlington County DES, Transportation Division. Mapping Appendices assistance provided by the Arlington DES, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Office. Development and demographic data provided by the Arlington DCPHD, Planning Research and Analysis Team (PRAT). 1 can spend more time enjoying the attractions of the region and current four-lanes in a single direction to better balanced two- Executive Summary: less time traveling. Arlington County seeks to continually directional streets. Sidewalks, crossings, curb space assignment expand the availability of transportation options, serving more and streetscape should also be revised. Removal of the existing Introduction: travelers as the region continues to grow. Fort Myer underpass of Wilson Boulevard could help to transform the Rosslyn street system and would allow for The Rosslyn Multimodal Transportation Study is an evaluation of One noteworthy transportation concern is how to transition reallocation of considerable street space to other uses. As the existing and planned transportation facilities, services and Rosslyn from a community with significant cut-through vehicle financial costs and disruptions of that change may prove operations for Rosslyn over the next 20 years.
  • Arlington Memorial Bridge Adjacent to the Base of the Lincoln Memorial

    Arlington Memorial Bridge Adjacent to the Base of the Lincoln Memorial

    Arlington Memorial Bridge HAER No. DC-7 Adjacent to the base of the Lincoln Memorial, spanning the Potomac River to Arlington Cemetery, VA. Washington District of Columbia PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA Historic American Engineering Record National Park Service Department of the Interior Washington, DC 20013-7127 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD ARLINGTON MEMORIAL BRIDGE HAER No. DC-7 Location: Adjacent to the base of the Lincoln Memorial, Washington, D.C., spanning the Potomac River to Arlington Cemetery, Arlington, VA. UTM: 18/321680/4306600 Quad.: Washington West Date of Construction: Designed 1929, Completed 1932 Architects: McKim, Mead and White, New York, New York; William Mitchell Kendall, Designer Engineer: John L. Nagle, W.J. Douglas, Consulting Engineer, Joseph P. Strauss, Bascule Span Engineer Contractor: Forty contractors under the supervision of the Arlington Bridge Commission Present Owner: National Capital Region National Park Service Department of the Interior Present Use: Vehicular and pedestrian bridge Significance: As the final link in the chain of monuments which start at the Capitol building, the Arlington Memorial Bridge connects the Mall in Washington, D.C. with Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia. Designed to connect, both physically and symbolically, the North and the South, this bridge, as designed in the Neoclassical style, complements the other monumental buildings in Washington such as the White House, the Lincoln Memorial, and the Jefferson Memorial. Memorial Bridge was designed by William Mitchell Kendall while in the employ of McKim, Mead and White, a prominent architectural firm based in New York City. Although designed and built almost thirty years after the McMillan Commission had been disbanded, this structure reflects the original intention of the Commission which was to build a memorial bridge on this site which would join the North and South.
  • One University Family 4500 University Drive Fairfax, Fairfax County, Virginia 22030

    One University Family 4500 University Drive Fairfax, Fairfax County, Virginia 22030

    Market Feasibility Analysis One University Family 4500 University Drive Fairfax, Fairfax County, Virginia 22030 Prepared For Ms. Stephanie Marcus SCG Development 8245 Boone Boulevard, Suite 640 Tysons Corner, Virginia 22182 Authorized User Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) 601 S. Belvidere Street Richmond, Virginia 23220 Effective Date July 9, 2019 Updated March 6, 2020 Job Reference Number 20-134 CR 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 Phone: (614) 833-9300 Bowennational.com Market Study Certification NCHMA Certification This certifies that Gregory Piduch, an employee of Bowen National Research, personally made an inspection of the area including competing properties and the proposed site in Fairfax, Virginia on July 9, 2019. This report is prepared as an update to the original study. All data within this study was updated and is true and accurate as of March 6, 2020 though the site analysis/evaluation is reflective of our original site inspection. Bowen National Research is a disinterested third party without any current or future financial interest in the project under consideration. We have received a fee for the preparation of the market study. However, no contingency fees exist between our firm and the client. VHDA Certification I affirm the following: 1. I have made a physical inspection of the site and market area 2. The appropriate information has been used in the comprehensive evaluation of the need and demand for the proposed rental units. 3. To the best of my knowledge the market can support the demand shown in this study. I understand that any misrepresentation in this statement may result in the denial of participation in the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program in Virginia as administered by VHDA.
  • Fy 2021 Adopted Capital Improvement Plan

    Fy 2021 Adopted Capital Improvement Plan

    FY 2021 ADOPTED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Arlington will be a diverse and inclusive world-class urban community with secure, attractive residential and commercial neighborhoods where people unite to form a caring, learning, participating, sustainable community in which each person is important. SUMMARY OF FY 2021 CAPITAL PLAN For FY 2021, the County proposed and adopted a one-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). As the County Manager stated in June 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has created far too much uncertainty in terms of an unstable financial outlook, an increased need for food, housing and health needs, and supporting the business community and workforce. The program presented in the adopted CIP considered the uncertain fiscal horizon of the County and focuses on essential investments with a one-year CIP. As part of the adopted FY 2021 budget, the County Board maintained the existing real estate tax rate at $1.026 per $100 dollars of assessed value (including stormwater tax). The adopted program centers on projects already in progress, projects that are critical to improving County infrastructure and assets, projects that meet legal and regulatory requirements, technology investments and commitments to invest in the stormwater infrastructure system. Highlights of the adopted CIP include: • Fire Station Renovations – The fire stations will be renovated to accommodate additional staff. Renovations include additional storage, living space, locker room facilities and upgrading decontamination areas. • Body Worn Cameras – The new technology will implement Body Worn Cameras for the Police Department and Sheriff’s Office in addition to initial upgrades to four courtrooms to support the program. • Trail Bridge and Modernization Program – This ongoing program will address the replacement of the pedestrian bridges in Glencarlyn and Lubber Run parks, which were destroyed in the July 2019 storm.
  • Table of Contents

    Table of Contents

    20130904 Table of Contents Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Highlights from the Final Report ................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Supplemental Report Objectives .................................................................................. 1-6 2.0 Refined Multimodal Package ............................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Roadway Refinement ..................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Transit Refinement ......................................................................................................... 2-5 2.3 Refined Package Model Results ................................................................................... 2-8 2.4 Peak-Only Tolls versus All Day Tolls .......................................................................... 2-20 2.5 Refined Multimodal Package Conclusions ................................................................. 2-22 3.0 Refined Bicycle and Pedestrian Recommendations ......................................................... 3-1 3.1 Bicycle and Pedestrian Project Refinement ................................................................ 3-2 3.2 Regionally Significant Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects ............................................ 3-4 3.3 Additional Considerations for Bicycle
  • Nomination Form, N.D

    Nomination Form, N.D

    NPS Form 10-900 0MB No. 1024--0018 (Rev. Au g. 2002) United States Department of the ln.terior Vt-fL 1z/10(0o National Park Service fJ tttf .~w NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES REGISTRATION FORM This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If any Item does not apply to the property being documented. enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance. enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative Items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor. or computer. to complete all items. ==================================================================================-===-======= 1. Name of Property =======================·-=================================--==============-===-===-==-======== historic name Arl ington Ridge Park (000-9707) '> other names/site number U.S. Marine Corps War Memorial (000-9707-0001/000-1233): Netherl3nds Carillon (000-9707- 0002/000-1239): Nevius Tract: lwo Jima Memorial -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------·----------------------------------------·-------------·--- ··---·--·---------------·-·-----------------------·--·-------------
  • SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATING and FINANCIAL DATA for the Quarter Ended June 30, 2015

    SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATING and FINANCIAL DATA for the Quarter Ended June 30, 2015

    SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATING AND FINANCIAL DATA For the Quarter Ended June 30, 2015 INDEX Page Investor Information 2 2015 Business Developments 3 - 4 Common Shares Data 5 Financial Highlights 6 Funds From Operations 7 - 8 Funds Available for Distribution 9 Net Income / EBITDA (Consolidated and by Segment) 10 - 13 EBITDA by Segment and Region 14 - 15 Consolidated Balance Sheets 16 Capital Structure 17 Debt Analysis 18 - 20 Unconsolidated Joint Ventures 21 - 23 Square Footage 24 Top 30 Tenants 25 Lease Expirations 26 - 27 Leasing Activity 28 - 29 Occupancy, Same Store EBITDA and Residential Statistics 30 Capital Expenditures 31 - 34 Development Costs and Construction in Progress 35 Property Table 36 - 48 Certain statements contained herein constitute forward-looking statements as such term is defined in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. They represent our intentions, plans, expectations and beliefs and are subject to numerous assumptions, risks and uncertainties. Our future results, financial condition and business may differ materially from those expressed in these forward-looking statements. You can find many of these statements by looking for words such as “approximates,” “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” “intends,” “plans,” “would,” “may” or other similar expressions in this supplemental package. We also note the following forward-looking statements: in the case of our development and redevelopment projects, the estimated completion date, estimated project cost and cost to complete; and estimates of future capital expenditures, dividends to common and preferred shareholders and operating partnership distributions.
  • Congratulations to the 2017 Pace Winners!

    Congratulations to the 2017 Pace Winners!

    CONGRATULATIONS TO THE 2017 PACE WINNERS! www.bestapartmentsindc.com BEST IN SHOW One Hill South, Washington, DC WINNERS Affordable Lease Up Mark at Salem Station, Virginia Metro Village Apartments, Washington, DC E-Lofts Alexandria, Virginia Novus Odenton, Maryland Cedar Ridge Apartments, Virginia One Hill South, Washington, DC Parke Laurel Apartments, Maryland Monarch Mills, Maryland Solaire Bethesda, Maryland Prospect Hall, Maryland Shady Grove Apartments, Maryland The Elms at Signal Hill Station, Virginia Prosperity Flats, Virginia Spring Garden Apartments, Maryland St. Mary’s Landing Apartments, Maryland Market Rate The Chesapeake, Washington, DC Senior 2001 Clarendon Boulevard, Virginia The Elms at Kingstowne, Virginia Allen House Senior Apartments, Ashton at Judiciary, Washington, DC The Elms at Oakton, Virginia Washington, DC Bainbridge Shady Grove, Maryland The Monterey, Maryland Emerson House, Maryland Bellemeade Farms, Virginia The Saratoga, Washington, DC Linden Park, Maryland Broadlands Apartments, Virginia Westbrooke Place, Washington, DC Lockwood House, Virginia Columbia Town Center, Maryland Marywood Apartments, Virginia Crystal City Lofts, Virginia North Street Senior Residence, Maryland Ivy Club, Maryland JUDGE’S CHOICE Affordable Market Rate Island Walk, Virginia Berkshire Annapolis Bay, Maryland The Elms at Stoney Run Village, Maryland Icon at Dulles, Virginia The Point at Park Station, Virginia Senior Gables Dupont Circle, Washington, DC The Point at Silver Spring, Maryland Kentlands Manor, Maryland Gables Upper Rock,
  • District Boundary Increase 1

    District Boundary Increase 1

    NPS Fonn 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 (Rev. Aug. 2002) (Expires Jan. 2005) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES REGISTRATION FORM This fonn is for use in nominating or requesting detenninations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register ofHistoric Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Fonn I0-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name Buckingham Historic District (Boundary Increase) other names/site number DHR File No. 000-0025 2. Location street & number Area bounded by and including N. Oxford Street, Fifth Street North, North Henderson Road, First Street North, and Second Street North state Virginia code VA county Arlington code 013 zip code 22203 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under theN ational Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certifY that this _x_ 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.
  • Washington, D.C. Area Relocation Guide

    Washington, D.C. Area Relocation Guide

    Washington, D.C. Area Relocation Guide 1 WASHINGTON, D.C. AREA RELOCATION GUIDE MG2 We create transformative experiences for brands, destinations, buildings and most importantly, the CONTENTS Attractions / 3 people who enjoy them. Events / 4 Restaurants / 4 Architectural History / 5 Retail / 6 Surrounding Areas / 7 PEOPLE MAKE THE PLACE Family / 9 At MG2, we dive in and dig deep. We enjoy what we do and the people we do Transportation / 9 it with. We’re curious, empathetic and (mostly) ego-free. We push each other MG2 Office / 10 to be even better, support each other when things get stressful and go all out to help our clients achieve their goals. Our culture is based on recognition and appreciation. So we celebrate birthdays. And anniversaries. And every Friday, we get together for an all-office breakfast buffet. We design over-the-top, insanely detailed gingerbread houses, dominate rec- league sports and know all the best happy hours around. Most importantly, we take time to give back to our communities, together. LIFE IN WASHINGTON, D.C. There’s no shortage of entertainment in the greater D.C. area. MG2’s east coast office is located eight miles west of downtown Washington, D.C. in McClean, VA and minutes away from Tysons Corner Center, the largest shopping mall in the state and Baltimore-Washington area. In addition to the upscale retail environments, the locale boasts incredible parks and gardens, six professional sports teams and numerous acclaimed museums and historic sites. And for candidates looking to relocate with a family, schools in the suburbs around D.C.