HPC meeting summary 05282025 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

builders. In this case, its notable details make it very significant, as an example of a small humble farmhouse with these amazing details. There were questions about the orientation to the road and if the alignment of Smith Level Road has been changed, and about how to evaluate the cultural significance. There was a sense that if a property was just average in every area of the evaluation, this new form might automatically determine that an average resource is eligible. So how do we discern all this? Properties should be eligible to be landmarks for being important/significant in just one of these main criteria categories. So in the first section, maybe there's a way to restructure it to allow properties to stand out or shine in one or two areas of significance, but not all of these. Maybe meet a minimum threshold. In its present form, this creates too many options/paths and might dilute its chance. So maybe structure this differently so that you have to be "special" in just one or two categories. Underrepresented might be under cultural. Like broader categories that will help us determine that something possesses "special" significance. So that you end up ranking things in maybe four categories. And using NA is an OK answer too. So maybe collapse all these down into fewer major categories. You'd be checking boxes in this first section, rather than scoring for all these attributes. So then maybe the scoring is more useful in the "integrity" section. The old form did that by assigning different weights for each box. So maybe take the top most criteria. All it needs to do is to get a checkbox in one of the top categories. Then you apply the underlying criteria, with a score, for condition, integrity, rarity, at risk etc. Not unlike the National Register criteria, which keeps the thinking at a high level. We determine why/what category it might be special in, without a score, then we apply the integrity criteria with scoring. A property can just be significant for its cultural aspects and have very little architectural or physical integrity. So we will judge on its merit and context. Rarity can be an example of something that is mostly gone, few survive with these details etc. We may still need to have a "mitigating circumstances" section. The rubric idea is still important. What makes something significant as a tenant house? Here's it's quality, and the nature of its quality is that its well documented or its rare or the best preserved of its type. So maybe it needs to have a set number of the checkboxes. It just needs to pass. The apples versus oranges situation. We need to have the rubric as backup. The NR criteria tend to bias toward precious, fine buildings, and against the sort of ordinary rural, even trashy, landscape. We don't want to give credit just for being on the NR?? Some things are objective, maybe integrity and rarity, as these can be quantified to some degree at least. Back in 2000, this was considered a rural setting, but now its definitely rapidly developing. It's actually remarkable that it survived, only due to the owner's love for the property. Members worked through the rest of the draft form with more discussion about the categories and criteria. Again, NA proved to be relevant. Maybe the mantels are considered "contributing features" as they are exceptional. For the integrity criteria, a really important structure might be in really bad condition. This goes back to having the rubric, that clarifies what is good condition versus bad condition. Condition applies to the fabric of the structure, rather than whether or not it has a modern HVAC or kitchen. Do we need to use points or not for this process? At risk? Well, larger tract could be subdivided and sold for lots for a subdivision? It's assessed tax value has almost doubled under the new updated county tax valuations, so that helps illustrate the risk. In the final tally, this property scores at around 57 or 58 using the new form. 149:00 b. DNA project at Black burial sites by ASHES Lab at NCSU: This proposal calls for examining the graves at the cemetery for the enslaved workers at Hardscrabble Plantation, to gather samples in a respectful way to analyze for DNA of the burial soil, to assess the bacterial microbiome DNA and maybe with luck some human DNA. The unique nature of each human's microbiome can be used to learn about diseases and health patterns of communities, and possibly can be correlated to living descendants. Discussion followed about the nature of the sampling, how invasive it might be, and the ethics associated with any activity at a historic or prehistoric human grave. This is being done in partnership with the local non-profit group called Indigenous Memories, founded 2