The loss of the concrete walkway to the front porch. <br />The trees planted as a visual barrier in the front of the house. <br />Blackberries and holly that are densely overgrown on the west and south sides of <br />the property where there were historically agricultural <br />fields. <br />The loss of additional trees from the former orchard and the planting of new trees/ <br />large shrubs west of the house. <br />The loss of greenhouse, business office, smokestack, and barn associated with the <br />Chase agricultural enterprise west of the house. <br />The construction of a tractor garage that was later converted to a non-compatible <br />rental unit adjacent to the house. <br />The applicant follows this with some discussion of opponent's testimony that argues that the landscape <br />is a vernacular landscape type. The applicant states that they do not dispute that there is a vernacular <br />landscape, but rather, that there is not enough information to conclude that it is significant based on the <br />lack of clarity in the nomination, additional research, and evaluation of present-day conditions. <br />Based on consideration of the applicant's evidence about the significance of the Harry and Etta Chase <br />House, coupled with the lack of specificity provided by the nomination about whether the landscape <br />associated with the house was intended to be a historically significant site, the Board finds that this <br />factor does not require preservation of the building or features on the site. <br />Factor 5: Value to the community <br />The applicant states that the value of the Chase House is not well established. It is a private, owner- <br />occupied residence and is screened from the street by landscaping, often going unnoticed by passersby. <br />Additionally, the applicant notes that it is located in a high-density residential neighborhood which <br />further diminishes its value in the community as a bungalow associated with the Chase family. <br />Carter argues that the Chase property has value to the community because the property owners, Eugene <br />Historic Review Board, State Historic Preservation Office, State Advisory Committee on Historic <br />Preservation, and the Keeper of the National Register all reviewed the nomination and deemed the <br />ensemble of enough value to list. Carter also points out that many National Register properties are in <br />private ownership, occupied by owners, and screened from view. <br />In considering this factor, the Board finds that the value of the property as a historic resource does not <br />warrant its preservation when considering other factors. <br />Factor 6: Economic consequences <br />The applicant makes the case for economic consequences based on three documents: rehabilitation <br />feasibility assessment prepared by Meritus (Exhibit J to their materials); the construction economic <br />impact statement from Meili Construction (Exhibit K to their materials); and the community benefit <br />statement from Cornerstone Housing (Exhibit L to their materials). <br />Final Order: The Harry and Etta Chase House I HDM 21-1/ HA 21-3/ ARB 21-2