I'm a huge proponenet of Historic Preservation and a former ECU Planning Graduate.

I agree that:

1. The new development should incorporate mixed use components. 
2. It would be cool if there was some level of inclusion, if possible and if it does not kill the project- if its possible to creatively keep the building there but build around it or maybe even over it.  How to include it, I am not sure.

I dissagree that:

1. It adds much uniqueness, as is, to town. Its old but by no means architecturally interesting- in my opinion- or a game changer.  Other than the windows and 'streamline moderne' style awning, I think it is a building that lacks much character and detail (and probably funding, for its day).  If it were torn down, it might be a shame, but its not a shame like the old NY Penn Station, or the old Chicago Federal building- or even close to the shame as if we tore down our theater or warehouses downtown. 
2. That it should be a problem left to the developer. (what in the world would he want with that small building?)  For many developers, this would be a game changer, I would pack up and ask my team to start looking elsewhere. 

I'm all in agreement of Burnham's "make no little plans" but in this case, my 'big plan' would suggest focusing on the relocation of this building and to look at a mixed use for the entire block. This block is way too important to leave 1/5th of the block unchanged due to this building.  Of course we need to save history and plan from our heart, but the planning profession was intended to be a pragmatic and rational profession.  

One of my best friends loves her 1960's VW bug but she can't even fit her baby's car seat- we are not in highschool anymore; the times, they are a changing. 

#4: randolf -  

 Ask yourself, are we City looking for an identity?  Has our entire indentity been tore to the ground?  Would you support giving our City an identity?  What is identity? What is the meaning of the sense of place?  Do we provide that PLACE?  Would this deliver a sense of place to our community?  Does this idea of preservation serve public equity? Answer these questions and then cast your vote.