This report was written in January 1984.

1. Name and location of the property: The property known as the W. G. Rogers House is located at 524 East Boulevard, in Charlotte, North Carolina.

2. Name, address, and telephone number of tile present owner of the property:
The present owner of the property is:

Mr. John B. Geer
800 Bromley Road
Charlotte, NC 28207

Telephone: (704) 372-4499

3. Representative photographs of the property: This report contains representative photographs of the property.

4. A map depicting the location of the property:This report contains a map which depicts the location of the property.

5. Current Deed Book Reference to the property: The most recent deed to this property is listed in Mecklenburg County Deed Book 4607 at page 544. The Tax Parcel Number of the property is: 121-051-12.

6. A brief historical sketch of the property: This report contains a brief historical sketch of the property prepared by Dr. William B. Huffman.

7. A brief architectural description of the property: This report contains an architectural description of the property prepared by Mr. Thomas W. Hanchett.

8. Documentation of why and in what ways the property meets the criteria set forth in N.C.G.S. 160A-399.4:

a. Special significance in terms of its history, architecture, and/or cultural importance: The Commission judges that the property known as the W. G. Rogers House does possess special significance in terms of Charlotte-Mecklenburg. The Commission bases its judgment on the following considerations: 1) the initial owner and most probably the designer of the house was Willard G. Rogers, an architect of local and regional importance and from 1906 until about 1916 a partner of C. C. Hook; 2) the W. G. Rogers House, erected in 1902, is one of the earliest examples of the Dutch Colonial Revival style in the city of Charlotte; and 3) the W. C. Rogers House is a well-preserved example of upper middle class housing in turn-of-the-century Dilworth, Charlotte’s first streetcar suburb.

b. Integrity of design, acting, workmanship, materials, feeling and/or association: The Commission contends that the attached architectural description by Mr. Thomas W. Hanchett demonstrates that the W. C. Rogers House meets this criterion.

9 Ad Valorem Tax Appraisal: The Commission is aware that designation would allow the owner to apply for an automatic deferral of 50% of the Ad Valorem taxes on all or any portion of the property which becomes “historic property.” The current appraised value of the .241 acres of land is $31,500. The current appraised value of the improvements is $38,980. The total current appraised value is $70,480. The property is zoned 06.

The modest but attractive house built by longtime Charlotte architect Willard G. Rogers and his wife, Eva, at 524 East Boulevard in Dilworth, reflects the middle-class comfort typical of much of Charlotte’s first streetcar suburb. Dilworth was developed by Edward Dilworth Latta beginning in 1891, and was facilitated by the installation of the city’s first electric streetcar line (which replaced an older, horse-drawn one) in that year by his company, the Charlotte Consolidated Construction Company, commonly known as the 4C’s. Originally laid out in a grid pattern repeating those of the center city, and for which East and South Boulevards were the main streets, Dilworth’s main attraction, from 1891 to 1909, was Latta Park at the end of the trolley line. The beautifully landscaped park, complete with a lake and pavilion, hosted many sporting events and traveling shows, and was the outdoor social center of the city. Dilworth was always an eclectic neighborhood, which ranged from the mill village surrounding the Atherton Cotton Mill (1892-3, built by D. A. Tompkins, the city’s New South industrialist) on the south side of the town, to the various modest but solid houses of a prospering middle class, to the great houses of the wealthy. Latta himself built his grand manse on East Boulevard in 1902 on the site presently occupied by the Greek Orthodox Church.¹

It was the same year that Willard and Eva Troy Rogers bought their property from the 4C’s on the same side of the street less than a block away.² Willard G. Rogers (1863-1947) and Eva Troy Rogers (1871-1942) were both natives of Cincinnati, Ohio. They moved to Charlotte about 1900, where he was employed as an architect for Stewart W. Cramer, who later operated the Cramerton Mills in Cramerton. At the turn of the century, Cramer had his own engineering and contracting firm which built and supplied cotton mill machinery and equipment. In 1940, the East Boulevard house was sold to Mae King Blume, who bought a number of Dilworth properties in the Thirties and Forties, including the Walter Brem house at 211 East Boulevard, where she lived for many years. Mrs. Blume, the widow of John H. Blume, was, in the Thirties, the proprietor of the Piedmont Hotel, Queen City Hotel, Frances Hotel, Windsor Hotel, Southern Hotel, the Franklin Hotel and the manager of the New Albert Hotel.³ In 1982, the house was sold to the present owners, Gary Benner and John Geer, who, the year before, had also bought and restored the old W. T. McCoy house designed by Hook and Rogers.⁴ The Rogers house well deserves preservation and restoration as part of Dilworth’s heritage as a valued and distinct part of turn-of-the-century Charlotte.

The W.G. Rogers house is one of Charlotte’s earliest examples of the Dutch Colonial Revival architectural style. Built about 1902, the one and a half story dwelling features the barn-like gambrel roofs characteristic of the style. Rogers was among Charlotte’s first architects, and he incorporated many “state-of-the-art” architectural features in his residence which are worthy of note. The massing of the W.G. Rogers house is simple and straightforward, in keeping with the dislike for Victorian complexity which many young architects felt around the turn-of-the-century. It is basically a square box with no wings. The gambrel roof has a large gambrel-roofed front dormer, and a large shed-roofed rear dormer which extends all the way across the back of the house. The roof is slate with copper guttering. A pair of exterior end chimneys contribute to the symmetrical effect. Walls are sheathed in wood shingles. The double-hung sash windows each have a large single-pane lower sash, and an elaborately geometrical upper sash composed of four main vertical panes and as many as twenty-four smaller triangular panes. The front dormer features a dentilled cornice and a bay window flanked by Doric columns. In early years this bay was an open balcony, but soon after the house was built Rogers glassed it in. Below the dormer is the recessed front porch, which originally ran the entire width of the front of the house. It has Doric columns set on a substantial brick railing wall, which is an extension of the brick main foundation of the house. A pair of round-arched openings at ground level containing fan lights provide natural illumination for the basement, and add an additional compositional element to the street facade. In the 1940s part of this porch was enclosed, and the front roof was extended slightly. The center entry has an elaborate transom of beveled glass over a pair of heavy wooden doors.

Inside, one moves through a small vestibule before entering the stairhall, which extends across the left front of the house. Next to the door, beneath the stair, is a Victorian inglenook. The stair rises in three flights. Its slender turned balusters are in the Colonial Revival style, but its unusual newel posts proclaim Rogers’ independence from strict interpretation of the style. The bullet-like wooden form of the main post is embellished with raised floral carving and a snake-like extension of the balustrade rail. The upper newel post has a cylindrical fluted shaft and a capstan top. The remainder of the interior lay-out shows the same eccentric mix of ideas found in the stair-hall. There is no center hallway, a feature used by many Colonial Revival architects, including Roger’s eventual partner C.C. Hook. Instead, rooms open one to another, somewhat in the Victorian manner. In the ceiling of the second floor hallway is a trapdoor to the attic. It contains a ladder that slides down on a system of pulleys, a noteworthy early example of the type of mass-produced ladder now common in suburban houses. The attic is unfinished. The yard of the W.G. Rogers house is rather compact, with narrow front and side yards. At the rear is a small gable-roofed servants’ house. It originally had three rooms, all sheathed inside with horizontal tongue-and-groove boarding. A small addition was added at its rear at a later date. Next to the servants’ house is the public alley which runs through the middle of this block. The W.G. Rogers house was converted to apartments in the 1940s, and has suffered some changes over the years. Part of the front porch was enclosed, and cut-glass transoms over the large front windows were removed and stored in the attic. The panelled pocket doors off the front stair hall were cut in order to insert conventional door jambs. A downstairs bathroom and two upstairs efficiency kitchens were added. Woodwork was painted and repainted, and plaster walls were allowed to crack and deteriorate. In the 1980s owner John Geer is restoring the residence. He has replaced modern windows, inserted in the front bay in recent years, with handcrafted replicas of the originals. He is beginning to strip woodwork and repair plaster, and has painted the wood-shingled exterior. Despite its years of deferred maintenance as rental property, the Rogers residence is surprisingly close to the way that its architect left it. Its room arrangement, expensive woodwork, and exuberant bathrooms are almost entirely as they were designed, as is its Dutch Colonial Revival exterior. The W.G. Rogers house is important to Charlotte as a rare early example of the architect’s art.

This report was written on April 1, 1981

1. Name and location of the property: The property known as the Robinson Rock House Ruin is located off Plaza Rd. extension in the northeastern section of Mecklenburg County.

2. Name, address, and telephone number of the present owner and occupant of the property:
The present owner of the property is:
The City of Charlotte
600 E. Trade St
Charlotte, NC 28202

Telephone: (704) 374-2241

3. Representative photographs of the property: This report contains representative photographs of the property.

4. A map depicting the location of the property: This report contains maps which depicting the location of the property.

5. Current Deed Book Reference to the property: The most recent deed to this property is listed in Mecklenburg County Deed Book 4313 at page 930. The current tax parcel number of the property is 105-122-14.

6. A brief historical sketch of the property: This report contains a brief historical sketch of the property by Dr. William H. Huffman, Ph.D.

7. A brief architectural description of the property: This report contains a brief architectural description of the property by Jack O. Boyte, A.I.A.

8. Documentation of why and in what ways the property meets the criteria set forth in N.C.G.S. 160A-399.4:

a. Special significance in terms of its history, architecture: and/or cultural importance: The Commission judges that the property known as the Robinson Rock House Ruin does possess special historic significance in terms of Charlotte-Mecklenburg. The Commission bases its judgment on the fact that the house was most probably built in the eighteenth century. Consequently, it dates from the earliest decades of the history of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. Moreover, the site has experienced minimal ground disturbance and, therefore, is particularly well suited for an archeological dig. The only other known eighteenth-century rock house in Mecklenburg County, the Hezekiah Alexander House, is not suited for an archeological dig because of massive ground disturbance which has occurred over the years.

b. Integrity of design, setting, workmanship, materials, feeling and/or association: The Commission judges that the architectural description included herein demonstrates that the property known as the Robinson Rock House Ruin meets this criterion.

9. Ad Valorem Appraisal: The Commission is aware that designation would allow the owner to apply annually for an automatic deferral of 50% of the Ad Valorem taxes on all or any portion of the property which becomes “historic property.” The current Ad Valorem tax appraisal on the entire 119.96 acre tract is $750. The parcel is exempted from the payment of Ad Valorem taxes.

Date of Preparation of this Report: April 1, 1981

Prepared by: Dr. Dan L. Morrill, Director
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Historic Properties Commission
3500 Shamrock Dr.
Charlotte, N.C. 28215

Telephone: (704) 332-2726

The Robinson Rock House was built on the site originally granted to Robert Robison (Robinson) by George Augustus Selwyn in 1767 and King George III in 1769.¹ The Selwyn tract of 212 acres and the King’s grant of 200 acres overlapped to the extent of about one-third of each area, and the stone house site was located in this area. On April 14, 1783, Robert Robison, Sr. divided the combined Selwyn tract and the crown grant between his two sons, Robert Robison, Jr.² and John Robison;³ the latter parcel encompassed the location of the stone house.

Presently the ownership of the land is not known from the acquisition of the site by John Robison in 1783 until the “stone house tract” is willed by a Matthew Wallace to his son Albert Wallace in 1854.⁴ Since this period covers the likely date of construction of the house, the original date and the builder are unknown. Later deeds refer to the dwelling as the “Robinson Stone House,” but whether this means John Robison or one of his heirs or relatives has yet to be determined.⁵ It is believed that the date the house was built is carved on a stone now buried in the ruins on the site, which could be discovered by an archeological study.⁶ Judging by the dates of construction of other stone houses in the area, the Robinson Stone House was probably built between 1780 and 1810. By the time of its ownership by Matthew Wallace in 1850’s, the house was apparently part of a large plantation, and probably was rented to various tenants. Matthew Wallace and his son Albert appeared to have lived in a large, elegant plantation house known and the “White House,” which was located to the southeast of the stone house about two miles.⁷

Albert Wallace sold off the stone house from his holdings as a 75-1/2 acre tract to Wesley Griffin on July 31, 1862.⁸ From the latter owner the same tract passed to Robert Simpson, who in turn sold the property to George Jordan on January 16, 1871.⁹ George Jordan (1818-1899) and his wife, Mary Eveline Notes Jordan (1821-1909), were the last residents of the stone house.¹⁰ According to his grandson, Baxter Jordan (b. 1890), George had a blacksmith shop and woodworking shop near the house in which he made a variety of products, including wagons and farm implements. The farming of Jordan’s plantation, which included an adjoining 15-1/2 acres (totaling 227 acres) was left to three tenant farmers. In addition to some livestock and food crops, the primary crop was cotton. George Jordan, and perhaps his predecessors, prospected for gold on the property, apparently without substantial results. Jordan worked a pit behind the house with a “bucket and windlass” operation.¹¹

After George Jordan died on May 18, 1899, his widow moved from the house and the property was willed to his three children; the site was never occupied or cultivated again.¹² The children in turn sold their respective one-third interests in the site to N. W. Wallace, a former sheriff of Mecklenburg County, who bought it for an investment.¹³ Unfortunately, during Wallace’s ownership the house was not cared for and fell into ruins. N. W. Wallace died in 1928, and the site was bought from his heirs by Beulah W. Grier, wife of Joseph W. Grier, Sr., who owned large acreage immediately to the west of this tract. ¹⁴ In 1978, the land parcel which included the stone house was willed by Mrs. Grier to her son, Joseph W. Grier, Jr., a Charlotte attorney.¹⁵ Less than a year later, in September, 1979, the site was acquired by the City of Charlotte to be incorporated into a new park and nature preserve.¹⁶

NOTES

¹ Meck. Co. Deed Book 3, p. 296 (8 January 1767) and Book 17, p. 270 (4 May 1769).

² Meck. Co. Deed Book 11, p. 296 (288 acres).

³ Meck. Co. Deed Book 11, p. 234 (212 acres).

⁴ Meck. Co. Will Book I, p. 246.

⁵ e.g., Meck. Co. Deed Book 144, p. 236.

⁶ Interview with Baxter Jordan, Concord, N.C., Dec. 26, 1980. Baxter Jordan is the grandson of the last resident of the stone house, George Jordan.

⁷ Meck Co. Deed Book 5, p. 259.

⁸ Meck. Co. Deed Book 4, p. 668.

⁹ Meck. Co. Deed Book 7, p. 130 (Simpson to Jordan). The transfer from Griffin to Simpson has not yet been uncovered.

¹⁰ Interview with Baxter Jordan. George and Mary E. Jordan are buried in the Hickory Grove Methodist church cemetery.

¹¹ Ibid. Baxter said that George discovered a small nugget in his pit, but was conned out of it by a “miner” who said he could get Jordan a big price for his mine if he could show the nugget to prospective buyers. Jordan loaned the man the gold to show, but the “miner” was never heard from again.

¹² Meck. Co. Will Book N. p. 233.

¹³ Meck. Co. Deed Book 144, p. 236 (16 Feb. 1900); Book 152, p. 318 (17 Nov. 1900); Book 256, p. 188 (18 Nov. 1909).

¹⁴ Meck. Co. Deed Book 717, p. 489.

¹⁵ Meck. Co. Will 78-E-2221.

¹⁶ 17 September 1979.

Charlotte’s historic building inventory received an extraordinary supplement in the winter of 1981 when remnants of a hitherto unknown eighteenth century stone dwelling were discovered within present day municipal boundaries. Rare indeed are examples of stone buildings erected by pioneer settlers in Mecklenburg County. Thus, the find is an event of marked significance and unique importance in the architectural history of this community. Cut into a gently sloping hillside among the headwaters of historic Reedy Creek, scattered foundation stones outline graphically the size and shape of the original house. Stones of various sizes and shapes lie in disarray inside the foundation walls and conceal the earth as well as any wood, iron or glass fragments which might remain from the original house. Somewhat smaller than neighboring contemporary stone houses of Hezekiah Alexander and Ezekial Wallace, the dwelling is a modest version of the remarkable wilderness architecture created by hardy immigrants who brought the style from their homes in Maryland and Pennsylvania. The abandoned house had few visitors during most of this century. Its remote location was protection against vandals and souvenir seekers, but not against the ravages of time and nature. Storms and falling trees have inflicted major damage on the structure.

The decaying trunk of a huge elm spans the rear half of the house, where it fell long ago. This falling monster devastated most exterior walls and all of the original wood, roof and floor systems. So complete was the damage that little evidence is visible to tell of the roof, side wall, or chimney forms. Now only one lone section of original masonry rises higher than a few feet above piles of stone rubble which surround the foundation. At the southeast corner of the house is a wall, twenty feet above grade at its highest, which includes wide parts of the original south and east facades. These remaining wall panels are large enough to illustrate the skill of the artisans who built the house. The masonry closely resembles the stone work in the companion Wallace and Alexander dwellings. Wail surfaces are random coursed ashlar with small chip infill fragments used here and there in widening joints. The extraordinary stone work is carefully executed with precise corner faces worked alignment, consistently horizontal jointing and wall into a uniform plane. Stones are of various sizes, averaging perhaps two to three square feet in surface area. Occasionally larger pieces were used, and one at the base of the south wall is a massive unit six feet long and a foot high. Initial compass readings indicate that the structure was placed on an exact north-south magnetic orientation. From its site a few yards north of Reedy Creek, the main facade faces south, consistent with the custom of the time. This south wall is thirty three feet across and appears to have been three bays wide. In this existing stone work, where wood jambs were installed, are straight vertical edges and three openings spaced equally. This pattern hints of a center entrance flanked by single windows.

In the remains of the north wall is evidence of three similar openings where tumbling stones still reveal a center door and side windows. No evidence indicates any side wall openings. Exterior dimensions of the house are thirty three by twenty nine feet. The stone foundation walls are two feet thick from the ground to the first floor. At this level a narrow water table bands the house on all four sides. On the south the ledge is about three feet above grade. Sloping up along each side the ground is less than a foot below the water table along the north side. Inside surfaces of the wall remnants show narrow ledges at two levels. These offsets coincide with the support pattern which would have been needed for wood floor joists. At the first floor the support ledge is approximately nine inches below the water table. For the second floor the offset is about nine feet higher. The level of the two ledges offers strong evidence of the original floor to floor distance, as well as the methods of construction used by the builders. At each offset the exterior wall thickness is reduced about four inches. So from a two foot thick foundation, the walls narrow to less than sixteen inches thick above the second floor. Exposure to weathering has stripped the existing interior wall surfaces of all visible evidence of original finishes. This stone work is a motley array of uncoursed random ashlar and rubble, and appears to be quite unsuitable for exposure to view. The surfaces are, however, laid up on a fairly uniform plane, as if in preparation for plaster or wood covering. Where the original walls remain intact at the southeast corner there are carefully fitted quoins from the ground up.

Shaped from granite pieces which vary in thickness from six to twelve inches, the long dimension of the stones change direction as the courses rise. This pattern of headers and stretchers gave added strength to the walls, while at the same time contributing to the very real beauty of the stone work. Lying slightly askew at the base of the south foundation are several large stones. Flattened on top and roughly cut into long rectangles, these blocks appear to have been steps. When stacked they reached to the top of the water table, or to the level of the original first floor. A brief tour of the wooded area surrounding the stone ruins reveals little clear evidence of original outbuildings. Such remains, if any, are concealed below decaying growth and accumulating humus from the years when no one was about. But the farm yard is not barren. There are two locations where wide, flat stones show evidence of special use. On one such stone, which measures about four feet across, there is a pattern of shallow veed grooves radiating out from an edge notch in a series of branches as if to collect liquid. This stone is some fifty feet south of the house under a huge old poplar and rests among a ride scattering of smaller stones. Off to the west, also about fifth; feet from the house, is another, somewhat smaller flat grooved stone. On this remnant veed grooves follow a fanlike pattern and radiate also from an edge notch. Smaller stones are scattered here also. There are several other nearby piles of rubble and shaped stone — the likely sites of small wood buildings for farm activities. A few paces east of the house ruins is a continuous depression much like an old road bed. This lane approaches from the north and runs southward past the house toward Reedy Creek. Recent dredging has disturbed the creek banks and removed signs of the earlier ford, if one in fact existed.

Conclusion

Settlement along Rocky River and its tributaries came early in the eighteenth century, and this fine stone dwelling appears to have been part of that wilderness venture. The house was likely built by John Robison in the 1780’s on crown grant land passed to him by his father, Robert. The original structure, while quite fine and substantial when compared with many of the other pioneer houses along the Catawba and Rocky Rivers, is yet not among the finest homes of the time and place. So one must judge John Robison’s affluence as limited. The Robison stone house probably followed in many ways the patterns found in contemporary dwellings erected nearby. The size is of primary importance if one is to make assumptions about the original plan and details, however. Rather than incorporating the popular center hall plan, it is likely that the house had two, perhaps three rooms on each floor and entrance at the front and rear was directly into one such room. At one corner there was probably a winding stair, at least partially enclosed, with storage below. On the end wall opposite the stair was a large stone chimney for fireplaces on both floors. Perhaps there were corner angle fireplaces on both floors. The house is hardly large enough for chimneys at each end. Above the second floor there was a garret with a steep winding stair. Headroom was sufficient for storage — even sleeping. Pole rafters probably formed a ridge with the long dimension of the house, and end wall gables were either stone or wood — stone being the more likely. The only openings in the end walls were small garret vents high in the gables. No windows were here — the openings sealed with wood blinds when necessary. Modest, yet meticulously crafted was the character of the Robison stone house. Trim was fabricated carefully, stone work skillfully executed and finishing details proudly done. This was the dwelling of people who were determined to retain a higher life style than the primitive wilderness might dictate.

1. Name and location of the property: The property known as the Reynolds-Gourmajenko House is located at 715 Providence Rd., Charlotte, NC 28207.

2. Name, address, and telephone number of the present owners and occupants of the property:
The present owner of the property is:
J. Chadbourn and Rosemary W. Bolles
435 Hempstead Pl.
Charlotte, NC 28207

Telephone: (704) 377-7042

The present occupant of the property is:
El Villa Restaurant
Mrs. Judy Lindsay
715 Providence Rd.
Charlotte, NC 28207

Telephone: (704) 375-5208

3. Representative photographs of the property: Three photographs of the exterior of the structure are included in this report.

4. A map depicting the location of the property: This report contains a map depicting the location of the property.

5. Current Deed Book Reference of the property: Attached you will find a copy of the state of North Carolina, Mecklenburg County deed listing of the property, book 2439, page 560.

6. A brief historical sketch of the property:

Blanche Reynolds, a native of Durham, NC, assembled, by purchases made in 1921 and 1923, the property upon which the Reynolds-Gourmajenko House stands. A woman of refinement, aristocratic tastes, and an independent spirit, Mrs. Reynolds inherited a considerable estate from Mr. Reynolds upon his death – an estate generated by the activities of the Southern Cotton Oil Co. Before beginning construction on the house in 1925, Mrs. Reynolds met Mr. Alexis Gourmajenko, a Russian emigre, in Italy during a tour of Europe. The were married and subsequently moved into the hose upon its completion in 1926. On April 26, 1941, the house was deeded to Mrs. Gourmajenko’s only child, Mr. Morgan Ayres Reynolds. On August 30, 1963, Mr. Reynolds and his wife, sold the house to Mr. J. Chadbourn Rosemary Bolles. Mr. and Mrs. Bolles currently lease the house to Ms. Judy Lindsay, who operates the El Villa Restaurant upon the premises.

*NOTE: On October 2, 2013, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Historic Landmarks Commission received a call from Rosalie Reynolds, the Granddaughter of Blanche and William Reynolds, informing them that William and Blanche built the house together and construction ended in 1928.  Mr. Reynolds died shortly thereafter in August of 1928.  Blanche Morgan Reynolds did not travel to Europe until after the death of her Husband, Mr. Reynolds.  In 1934, Blanche met Alexis Gourmajenko and they married shortly thereafter, they were married until his death in 1948.  Mrs. Reynolds-Gourmajenko never remarried.

Mrs. Gourmajenko was a woman who maintained an abiding interest in the arts. This aspect of her makeup no doubt played an important part in causing her to select the forceful and dramatic Tuscan Revival style of architecture for her home. Executed by William L. Bottomley of New York City, a renowned architect who designed several homes in Richmond, VA, where Mrs. Gourmajenko’s sister lived, the Reynolds-Gourmajenko House exhibits features common to this exquisite form of revival design. The low-pitched, projecting roof, composed of tiles imported from Cuba, the walled courtyard with a circular fountain in the center, the piazzas extending perpendicularly forward from both sides of the structure of the dwelling, all attest to the basic Tuscan Revival rendering of the R-G House. The house also possesses a certain Spanish overtone, but this is not unusual, because Tuscan Revival was one of the most flexible styles in American Revival architecture. It was especially popular in the nineteenth century, when it competed for dominance with the more widespread Gothic Revival. It was a composite style ultimately derived from the timeless domestic architecture of the Italian Campagna – of Tuscany, Umbria, Lombardy, and the Veneto – but interpreted in the US with unrestrained freedom and endless improvisation.

Mrs. Gourmajenko spared no expense on the interior treatment of the dwelling. Drawings were prepared for the interior elevations of the principal rooms. These drawings are available from Mr. Davyd Foard Hood, who is presently writing an MA thesis at the University of Virginia on the architecture of William L. Bottomley. Mr. William Griffin, an associate of Mr. Bottomley’s, made several trips to Charlotte to supervise personally the rendering of the interior. Two original paintings were prepared by the head of the Academy of Art in Rome for placement in the dining room. These paintings are now in the Paris apartment of Mr. Morgan Ayres Reynolds. Although the interior elegance of the structure has been tarnished somewhat by the placement of a restaurant in the building the Reynolds-Gourmajenko House still retains the spaciousness and refinement associated with Tuscan Revival interiors.

7. Documentation of why and in what ways the property meets the criteria set forth in NCGS 160A-399.4:

a. Historical and cultural significance: The structure would seem to meet this criterion because the building is an excellent example of Tuscan Revival architecture. Indeed, there is nothing like it in Charlotte or Mecklenburg County. Also worth noting is the fact that it was designed by an architect of considerable reputation.

b. Suitability for preservation and restoration: The building is in excellent repair, and its overall setting is still intact, including the magnificent grounds. This building is highly suited for preservation and/or renovation.

c. Educational value: The educational value of this structure centers around the fact that it is the only local example of Tuscan Revival architecture with this degree of refinement. It also communicates to the observer the values and tastes of the American aristocracy of an earlier era.

d. Cost of acquisition, restoration, maintenance, operation or repair: The Commission has no intention of acquiring this property. The cost of acquisition would be high. The 1974 tax appraisal for the house was $184,520.00. This suggests that the property and house would cost well in excess of $200,00.00. To restore the house to its original condition would be substantial only for the interior. The maintenance and operation costs for the structure are currently low enough to allow a restaurant to operate in the structure. As indicated above, the building is generally in excellent repair.

e. Possibilities for adaptive or alternative use of the property: This criterion is easily met by the fact that a restaurant currently occupies the structure.

f. Appraised value: As noted above, the 1974 appraised value of the house and property was $184,520.00. The appraised value for the house itself was $46,290.00. Again, the Commission has no intention of acquiring this property.

g. The administrative and financial responsibility of any person or organization willing to underwrite all or a portion of such costs: Since the property will remain in private hands, and since the Commission has no objection to the current adaptive use of the property, this criterion does not appear to be applicable.

8. Documentation of why and in what ways the property meets the criteria established for inclusion on the National Register: The Commission recognizes that it has no authority to recommend properties for inclusion on the National Register. It is required, however, by State Statute to measure properties which it recommends for local designation against the criteria for the National Register. Recognizing that the National Register ordinarily excludes properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years, the Commission nonetheless believes that the Reynolds-Gourmajenko House might qualify for the National Register on the grounds of Criterion C – (properties) “that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values….” The Reynolds-Gourmajenko House would not meet the other criteria for inclusion in the National Register.

9. Documentation of why and in what ways the property is of historical importance to Charlotte and/or Mecklenburg County: The historic significance of the Reynolds-Gourmajenko House for Charlotte and Mecklenburg County is considerable. As noted above, it is the only local building designed by William L. Bottomley, and only one other Bottomley structure is known to exist in North Carolina. Once part of an elegant residential setting. On balance, the Commission believes that the Reynolds-Gourmajenko House deserves the protection provided for historic properties by State Statute, subject to the approval of an ordinance by the appropriate agency of local government