On Wed, 10 May 2000, Leland Torrence wrote:

> << Any chance we could get a thumbnail sketch of the response? I'd like to
> see how my answers stack up. >>
>
> Me too.
>
> Me too.

I would have liked to have seen your answers first, but here are some
notes on the eight questions:

1.  Michael O'Hara

    Facade easement can be valid under UCEA
      RMCMPA is likely to be qualified recipient organization

    Tax deduction for easement donation has further requirements
      Historic designation (National Register or eligible)
      Fact that mall is less than 50 years old and not of outstanding
        significance would probably prevent any NR designation
      Easement in perpetuity

    Tax credits for restoration
      Historic designation (National Register or eligible)
      Fact that mall is less than 50 years old and not of outstanding
        significance would probably prevent any NR designation
      Substantial rehabilitation
      Secretary of the Interior requirements

    Other aspects of restoration
      City historic district commission approval may be needed
      Restrictive covenant also applies

2.  Victor Veenstra

    Restrictive covenant
      Proposed renovation in violation of covenant
      Enforcement can by by other owners in court
      City government would not be involved
      Issues of "taking" are not relevant, since not a regulation
    Historic district ordinance
      Approval is unlikely
      Disapproval of changes would still leave economic use of property
        (Euclid zoning case)

3.  Harold Newman

    Historic district ordinance -- approval unlikely
    Restrictive covenant -- if other owner(s) sue to enforce
    Suit over "taking" is premature without exhausting remedies
    Disapproval of fast food restaurant would still leave economic
      use of property (Euclid zoning case)

4.  Herbertville United Church

    Historic district ordinance -- approval unlikely
    Restrictive covenant -- if other owner(s) sue to enforce
    Constitutional claim of free exercise of religion
    But neutral laws of general applicability apply even to
      religious groups (Employment Division v. Smith, Boerne, etc.)
    Does regulation interfere with charitable/religious purpose?

5.  Earl Martinez

    House probably would get National Register designation
    Moving house would probably not be allowed under historic
      district ordinance -- approval would be required
    National Register listing would not prevent house from
      being moved; however, listing could be lost for that reason

6.  Red Maple County Mall Preservation Alliance

    Owner objection could prevent listing but would not prevent
      a finding of eligibility for National Register
    Changes to property would not be affected by NR listing
    Fact that mall is less than 50 years old and not of outstanding
      significance would probably prevent any NR designation

7,  Michigan Department of Transportation

    EIS should mention Swampland Mall as historic resource, given
      the local designation; this raises questions of EIS adequacy
    Repairing defect in EIS could delay but not prevent project
    Section 4F applies if federal funds involved
    Section 4F applies to all structures here due to local designation
    Section 4F would not allow either route unless there is no
      feasible and prudent alternative
    Section 4F issue: were other routes explored?
    Section 106 could apply if federal funds involved
    Section 106 would only apply to NR listed or eligible property,
      probably only the farmhouse
    Section 106 would bring involvement of Advisory Council
    Challenges to eminent domain unlikely to succeed
    Eminent domain would erase deed restrictions

8.  U.S. Veterans Administration

    NEPA applies, and EIS should be prepared
    EIS should document impact on all properties given local designation
    Section 106 may apply depending on National Register status of
      Grisham Farmhouse (likely) and Swampland Mall (unlikely)
    Section 106 would bring involvement of Advisory Council
    Challenges to eminent domain unlikely to succeed
    Eminent domain would erase deed restrictions