07/14/2003 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

this matter. He directed their attention to the section of the code that addresses how they should proceed, the demolition guidelines. He said reviewing some of the background on the development of the car dealership, evidently owned by C&C Realty, would be helpful. He said the issue of whether the buildings are in the district or not has been finally disposed of. The Building Commissioner, who raised the question and reviewed it, has determined, after consultation with the Law Department, it is within the district. Mr. O'Malley then reviewed the demolition guidelines. He said the first order of business is to examine whether or not the demolition of these structures will have a detrimental affect on the Landmarks District or the architectural character of the area, and the city in general. Mrs. Lord said the application is dated June 13. She asked if the six-month period referred to by Mr. O'Malley in his review would start from the date of application or the date of this meeting. Mr. O'Malley indicated he would look into that question. Mr. Lang said in a memo dated July 1, 2003 from Dave Conway, Building Commissioner, the buildings at the northwest corner of Butternut Ridge and Lorain are included in the historical district. He said that Mr. Conway indicated in his memo the Building Department will withhold the issuance of permits for any properties fronting Butternut Ridge from Columbia on the east, and through and including the two aforementioned buildings. That is the determination that grants the board permission to proceed with these discussions. He then quoted from Chapter 165, "it is the function of the Landmarks Commission to designate, preserve, protect, enhance and perpetuate those structures and districts which reflect outstanding elements of the city's cultural, artistic, social, economic, political, architectural, historic or other heritage." It has been noted that there have been various uses of the building referred to as Rebecca's, since its construction in 1898. It has primarily been a retail structure. This was the heart of the commercial district of the historic North Olmsted. It was a stop on the inter-urban line between downtown Cleveland and Elyria. It was the commercial hub of the city and served as a dry goods store, drug store, grocery store, and meat market. There was a library housed upstairs and various professional offices in the rear of the building. In 1928, the doctor's building housed a bank. Mr. Lang said the determination is they are the last surviving structures of the commercial hub of the City of North Olmsted and the question is whether or not the demolition of these structures would present a detrimental affect upon the historic district. Mr. Corell said he understands it is the oldest standing commercial structure in the city. Mrs. Lord said when the district was developed it was very intentionally drawn to include that corner. She added that Council approved what was drawn up. Mr. Barker asked if any of the board members knew why the district wasn't extended further if it included the corner. He then said the board has proved the corner parcel is in the district and now they have to argue the point of why the building should not be torn down. Mr. Corell said he is not sure the board should be making an argument in the absence of whoever the owner is. Mr. O'Malley said he would not say the commission should address its finding to the issue of the detrimental affect that the demolition would have on the district and the city as a whole. He would agree with the comments that it would be difficult to begin to address alternative uses for the buildings, the condition of the buildings, the potential return on investment, the efforts by the owner to secure probable new owners, without having input from the current owner. Mr. Lang said they should be addressing the demolition of the buildings as a detriinent to the community as a whole, and to the historic district specifically, regardless of any other issue. Mr. Barker brought up his recollections of the CVS proposal from a few years back. He said there were all sorts of reasons brought up why the building should be saved, and it wasn't. There was discussion of whether section 165 was part of the charter at that time. Mr. Barker gave some background on previous meetings with Mr. Halleen. He said that without Mr. Halleen or a representative present, he does not see how they can go any farther. G. Corell made a motion to table the proposal until the applicant can be present for a meeting. Mr. Lang said he would suggest it is premature for them to table this request prior to a continuation of their discussion as to the detriment to the community and the historic district as a whole by granting the request for demolition. The board will have to address the request for demolition some time but in order to address it, the board needs a rationale for denying the request. He said without a discussion as 4