EC 9.8180(2): The effects of the moving upon the use and development of the historic <br />property. <br />The applicant splits their evaluation under this criterion into two categories: Moving On-Site and Moving <br />Off-Site. <br />Moving On-Site: The applicant explains that while moving the house to the southwest corner of the site <br />would allow the proposed affordable housing project to be constructed as designed, it would reduce the <br />amount of outdoor community play space available for residents. Additionally, with a cost of more than <br />360/sf the applicant states that it is not financially rational to save the 1161 square foot structure which <br />has poor historic integrity and minimal significance. <br />Moving Off-Site: Cornerstone is willing to sell the building for $1 to anyone who can move it offsite (at <br />the buyer's expense) prior to groundbreaking for new development. Additionally, the applicant has <br />offered $20,000 in assistance to anyone who is interested in obtaining the home for $1 and moving it. <br />The applicant notes that the move would be a higher cost than an on-site move and would still result in <br />the house being removed from its context as a contributing resource to the Chase Gardens ensemble. <br />However, the applicant also notes that if the house were moved to a lot with open space it would <br />improve its integrity related to its setting and feeling. If it were moved to land that was more available <br />to the public, it could allow for viewing and interpretation of the house. <br />The above criterion is most concerned with a proposal to move a building and what impact a move would <br />have on the historic integrity of the property. In this case, the applicant is not proposing to move the <br />building but does provide a reasonable opportunity for another party to purchase the building for the <br />purpose of relocating it off-site. As for an on-site move, the applicant has not proposed this and relies <br />on cost concerns, as well as detailed analysis from Heritage consulting that takes issue with portions of <br />the nomination and points to deterioration of the building's integrity. Again, it noted that the Chase <br />House was not found to be a rare building type, or a particularly excellent example of its type. <br />Based on the available information, the request to demolish the building is reasonable and the above <br />criterion which requires consideration of a move does not prohibit the request to demolish the building. <br />EC 9.8180(3): The marketability of the property and the willingness of the property <br />owner to sell the property. <br />The applicant states that the current property owners, who are members of the Chase family, listed the <br />property for sale in 2020. As discussed in the applicant's Exhibit J, the value of the land made the group <br />of homes less marketable as single-family residences. Based on the value of the land, the Chase family <br />marketed the sale of the property for high-density residential development. The applicant states that <br />the Chase family is aware that the existing homes on the property will be demolished for the affordable <br />housing to move forward and sites their letters of support which are attached as Exhibit Q to the <br />application. The applicant notes that Cornerstone is willing to sell the house to anyone who can move it <br />prior to construction breaking ground, for $1. <br />Final Order: The Harry and Etta Chase House I HDM 21-1/ HA 21-3/ ARB 21-2