- 29 -
proximity to the Grist Mill and the Woodlawn Plantation. Its
physical feature “which [contributed] to the historic or cultural
importance” of the surrounding historical properties was its
natural state because that natural state provided the separation
of the modern world from the 18th century that MVLA and the
Woodlawn Plantation were attempting to preserve.
The mere possibility or conjecture of a quieter and more
peaceful atmosphere that might have been engendered by limited
development did not preserve this historic characteristic. To be
sure, there was a more peaceful environment before any
development occurred. The requests by Hyland, MVLA, or any other
influential groups to limit development simply indicate their
desire for a development that would limit the quantity or amount
of interference with the historic nature of the community.12 The
influence exerted by these groups only serves to illustrate some
of the difficulties that petitioner would encounter in the
development of the Grist Mill property. MVLA received a smaller
buffer than it had hoped for and no more than would have been
mandated by petitioner’s inability to build on the defined
floodplain. Therefore, petitioners fail to qualify on the basis
that they had preserved a historically important land area.
12The “requests” by Hyland and MLVA are also entitled to
less probative value because of petitioner’s role in drafting
those letters.
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011