I want to thank The Augusta Chronicle's editorial board for very clearly pointing out why we have a very strong and important need for historic preservation in Augusta and supporting the Historic Preservation Commission as the "guardian of the city's invaluable historic trademark." I hope and trust that we can rely on this support the next time we have to make a tough decision about development in our downtown historic district.

I am not going to try and convince the board that it was wrong in saying we did not go "far enough" in this particular case, because I actually agree with many of its points, and even this "compromise" building (by definition) is not "ideally" want I would want. I only wish that the board and others could have seen the computer-generated models and renderings that displayed the actual differences the compromises made. Had I not seen them myself, I would have likely taken the same strong stand that the editorial board has apparently taken.

FOR CLARITY and understanding I will address several of those editorial points specifically, however.

- The board member who you quoted as saying the design was "brutal and severe" is a registered professional architect who was involved in and agreed to the design compromise.

- The editorial asked, "A change of color? That's it?" The answer is no. There were many points of design compromise; however, the type of brick is the easiest to visualize. Others included detailing and presentation that help soften and change the overall look. It also includes two areas where design issues were left "on the table," for which the design team will have to come back to us for further review and approval.

- The architectural design team, (the exact same one that designed the Columbia County Library project you referenced) did a good job explaining the differences between the two projects when we asked. They also presented "real world" explanations about why a similar design would not be feasible for the Augusta library.

- The quick mediation was driven by the Library Board, not the HPC. We were surprised as everybody else, not that they appealed to the Augusta Commission, but that it was accepted for the May 6 agenda. This tied our hands for the timing of the legally required mediation.

- My charge to the HPC board was that our decision was to be made on the basis of our defined area of responsibility and expertise to historic preservation. If other factors such as schedule and budget were to overshadow the requirements of historic preservation, we would gladly support our elected Augusta Commission in making that decision.

HAD THE AUGUSTA Commission overruled HPC on May 6 for any number of legitimate reasons, the original design could have been built as presented with no compromise or additional consideration to the historic appropriateness. Because of the realities and constraints we faced, we felt it best to accept this compromise which, while not ideal, was certainly reasonable and acceptable to those of us who saw the actual affect of the changes.

I hope this whole incident demonstrates the need for designers and developers to come to us as the Historic Preservation Commission, or other organizations such as Historic Augusta, for guidance and direction early on in the design process. The historic preservation guidelines are readily available, and cover both new construction and renovation/preservation of existing buildings. As with several major projects recently, we are very willing to review design concepts in the schematic design phase of the projects. In addition to downtown, the other two controlled historic districts in the city are the Summerville and Olde Town areas.

(The writer, a professional engineer, is chairman of the Richmond County Historic Preservation Commission.)