| Melinda Hill, 1481 Mill Race, stated the Preliminary Report discussed |
|
| insignificance. She thought there was more information "out there" although it could be |
|
| difficult to find. At the time of designation, people knew the property owners of the |
|
| resources and knew about the moves and changes that took place, which was an |
|
| evolution of history over time. As property owners accumulated wealth or |
|
| prominence, they were able to make changes to these older structures because that |
|
| was part of the progress of the Community. Some of the properties that were |
|
| designated indicated the progress and they were only certain examples of a particular |
|
| architectural style. Although she was not an expert in National Register criteria, she |
|
| thought the criteria talked about what made things significant within a community. |
|
| Qualifying for listing under the National Register criteria was not a factor in whether |
|
| the property should be delisted. Was an appropriate decision made at the time of |
|
| original designation, and if so, we should be saving our history. She did not feel the |
|
| Committee should feel pressured to bring something back to City Council because the |
|
| State Act gave them more time. Research takes a long time and she thought more |
|
| could be done before a recommendation was made to Council. |
|
| Chairperson Thompson stated it would be helpful if the Committee could find |
|
| photographs or other documentary evidence about the appearance of the house |
|
| before it was moved, or any other information about the architectural practice of the |
|
| property owner. He noted the Report had not been forwarded to the State Historic |
|
| Preservation Office (SHPO) or the Public Hearing held. He stated he would like to |
|
| have the State’s comments before coming to a decision. He suggested the Committee |
|
| might consider requesting additional time from City Council. |
|
| Mr. Dziurman clarified the Committee also had a 180-day time frame on this request. |
|
| He stated in looking at the architecture, he saw some strange things on the building, |
|
| but he went back to the Greek Revival, and it looked like the property owner made |
|
| changes. He noted changes were allowed, particularly if the changes could be |
|
| removed to put the structure back to its original style. He agreed the Committee |
|
| needed more time as it was difficult to get the right information in that time period. |
|
