it is not the oldest. Additionally, the Gladys Chase House, while more recently constructed has a garden <br />associated with it making it more notable in the context of the ensemble. <br />Based on the available evidence, the Board finds that the age of the Harry and Etta Chase House does <br />not cause the need to preserve it when balancing other factors. <br />Factor 4: Historic significance <br />The applicant cites the Heritage report (Exhibit G to their materials) summarizing that the Chase House <br />was originally listed as being significant under Criterion B and Criterion C when nominated for listing as <br />a National Register resource. Criterion B relates to a property being associated with a significant person. <br />The Heritage report details Harry Chase's life beginning with his birth in Kansas and eventual move to <br />Oregon and attendance of Oregon State College. This was followed by his work in the Springfield <br />Cannery, the Eugene Fruit Growers Association, and later in the food distribution industry and work for <br />a County Clerk. The Heritage report concludes that while associated with the Chase family, nothing in <br />the nomination under Criterion B established Harry Chase's significance related to the Chase family's <br />contributions to the horticulture or floricultural industry, or development of Chase Gardens. <br />The Heritage report goes on to address Criterion C of the National Register nomination. Criterion C is <br />concerned with whether properties are notable for their design or construction. The Heritage report <br />notes features of the Chase House that are not consistent with the bungalow style like the L-shaped <br />porch and the double cross-gable roof. Additionally, alterations over time have further diminished the <br />integrity of the Chase House and the Heritage report concludes that the house fails to make a noteworthy <br />contribution due to its limited stylistic expression and alterations. <br />Testimony from Carter states that the National Register nomination appropriately applied Criterion B <br />and C when considering the ensemble as a whole, rather than each individual feature within the <br />grouping. Carter references the National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria <br />for Evaluation in making the point that unlike nominations for individual listings, ensembles do not need <br />to individually meet the criteria but may contribute to the overall integrity, creating a significant part of <br />a cohesive group. Carter also states that if new information has come to light, the appropriate process <br />for reevaluation is to submit a request for change to the State Historic Preservation Office. <br />Testimony from Baker received March 17, 2022 also argues that the Heritage report cannot undo the <br />process for nomination that already occurred. Baker also states that the Heritage report misinterprets <br />landscape as it relates to the nomination. In testimony received on March 24, 2022 and March 31, 2022 <br />Baker provides extensive comments and other evidence on the importance of the landscape related to <br />the Chase Ensemble. <br />Baker includes a quote from Section 3, Page 3 of the comments in the original nomination materials, <br />which is as follows: <br />The garden was designed by Gladys <br />Chase and an unidentified University of <br />Oregon landscape student. The garden was laid out to create the illusion of <br />space, while providing privacy. Mature trees dating from 1936 and include <br />hawthorn, pin oaks, evergreen privet, dogwoods, azaleas, vinca major, and oxalis <br />Final Order: The Harry and Etta Chase House I HDM 21-1/ HA 21-3/ ARB 21-2