• Characteristics of the existing housing stock ( e . g ., style , materials , construction method , and number of stories );
• Non-housing resources ( schools , religious properties , commercial , etc .), if applicable ;
• Distinctive layouts ( street patterns , etc .), if applicable ;
• Distinctive landscape features , if applicable ;
• HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW preservation priority rating ; and
• Any areas that have the potential for historic district designation .
In addition to completing survey forms for each subdivision , historians documented notable elements and architectural features with digital photography . Owing to the prohibitive number of individual buildings in each of the postwar subdivisions , the survey team developed a sampling method to record individual houses that reflected the prevailing architectural character and type in each subdivision . A comparison and analysis of architectural types documented during this survey process formed the basis for the development of architectural typologies . These typologies or categories represent varying time periods , scale , and styles of postwar housing in Arlington ( see Appendix F ).
During each of the three phases of the survey , the field crew used digital cameras to photograph all targeted resources . Camera settings allowed the images to be taken at a minimum resolution of four megapixels . In most cases , the targeted resources were photographed at an oblique view showing the front elevation and a side elevation . However , dense vegetation or siting of the resource resulted in front elevation photographic views for a handful of resources . In some cases , field crew members took additional photographs to document the resource ’ s character-defining features , decorative details , alterations , and / or additions . The HHM survey team undertook most of the fieldwork during the winter and spring months when the vegetation was minimal .
During the reconnaissance-level survey , the field crew recorded a baseline set of data on all individual properties including address , estimated construction date , type of property , salient physical characteristics ( number of stories and exterior materials ), alterations , stylistic influences , and cultural / architectural / historical value assessment ( HIGH , MEDIUM , or LOW ). All HIGHpriority individual resources and any resource classified as a contributing element within any of the historic districts that are listed in the NRHP were also documented using intensive-level survey forms that recorded more in-depth architectural information . The survey team developed another form to record information on the postwar subdivisions documented during Phase III of the survey . These forms were designed to note important physical features and design characteristics of the subdivisions and the types of resources within them . The survey team met with City of Arlington staff and Arlington Landmark Preservation Commission members prior to conducting the fieldwork to ensure that the survey information conformed to the City ’ s desired format .
DATA ANALYSIS
Following completion of fieldwork , all information collected in the field was entered into a Microsoft Access database that was developed for this project . Using this database , the HHM survey team generated reports that enabled team members to review all field data and priority assessments recorded in the field . This process began with a comparison of each documented property ’ s / neighborhood ’ s survey data to its associated photo or photos . Any discrepancies between information collected in the field and the true appearance of the property were noted and corrected on the survey forms . After reviewing all physical data collected in the field for accuracy , the survey team began assessing all preservation priorities assigned in the field . All
FINAL REPORT
ARLINGTON HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY UPDATE
SEPTEMBER 2007
5