 |
Citizens
for Property Rights is a coalition of citizens dedicated to the preservation of property rights, |
|
Matters
Historic (A) Already under way as of the 08 November website update was the attempt of several partiSell Normandy Oakses to compromise about the aesthetic appearance of rooftop equipment on the Fourth and Main Bank Building. [See] (B) A comment to VersagiVoice from one of the parties appears elsewhere on this page. (C) As this is written, another meeting of that city panel has failed to resolve the controversy. (D) Separately, the City Commission (CITCOM) denied another official historical panel permission to proceed with exploring whether two vacated school buildings can be saved by being designated historical, against the wishes of the School District. During CITCOM's discussion preceding its vote, Commissioner Drinkwine alluded to how the coerced designation of the Fourth & Main Bank Buildings is leading to non health & safety-related work for an already overburdened Code Enforcement Department. (E) In oral and written comments about all this, it became clear that residents and a city official or two are confusing the several official "historic" entities with each other and with the completely unofficial private historic society.
Each of the three official bodies is established by ordinance. [See] It was disappointing to see the LocoMoms contingent -- after those wonderful months of trying to save Whittier and Longfellow for the kids, the kids, the kids -- turn to saving the buildings for their own sake. It is difficult not to conclude that the thrust toward mandated historic designation was simple payback against the School Board, an institution which has often come across as arrogant and condescending. One ripple-effect of the debate was that a Public Comment speaker at the 20 Nov 06 City Commission meeting tried unsuccessfully to prevent appointment of one school-preservationists to the Historic District Study Committee. In similar contexts, VersagiVoice has maintained that those who would force historic designation on an unwilling property owner should pay fair market price for the property and assume legal obligation for its maintenance and repair. If you want to save it, buy it. -- FJV: 22 Nov 06 Condo
owner comments on Historic District Commission ruling All of us frequently must balance a variety of requirements in our daily lives and our jobs. Sergio decided to only address the building code requirements. He now complains that he should not have to address the other two requirements because he has spent a lot of money on the equipment, it meets code and the City has agreed it meets code. However, no one claims the City REQUIRED the specific design and the specific equipment Sergio unilaterally chose to meet his code obligations. Instead, three members of the HDC properly recognized that there is more than one way to skin a cat, and it believes that Sergio could have(and still can) meet the health and safety requirements while still maintaining the historic nature of the building. To date, he simply has chosen not to. We believe that alternatives that properly balance and meet ALL requirements were available to Sergio when he designed his rooftop and they still exist today. All the HDC and Skylofts have asked Sergio to do is to meet ALL of his obligations, not just one. We continue to stand ready to help Sergio design a rooftop that meets ALL of his obligations.-- Jim Vondale . . . 100 West Fifth St #408 Re matters
historical Cleaveland deserves especial praise for her wisdom and diplomacy while handling the recent request by that group of parents who had hoped to save Whittier and Longfellow elementary schools by having the structures designated historic. During the meeting of the Historic District Study Committee (which I attended as a visitor), I sensed that the committee members recognized the near-impossibility of getting one public body, the city commission, to force another public body, the school district, to go-historic against its wishes. So intensely committed were the LocoMoms, however, that instead of denying them the opportunity to move forward, Cleaveland advised them how best to prepare and present their case to the city commission. CITCOM listened attentively, debated a bit, then voted unanimously to deny the Historic District Study Committee's formal request to initiate the historic designation process. During her own presentation before CITCOM, Cleaveland explained that the Study Committee offers aid and guidance to anyone who voluntarily seeks, or agrees to seek, historic designation. With total transparency, Ruth quietly and reasonably guided the LocoMoms petitioners through a procedural transaction which certainly helped the general public gain insight into a deliberative process which by its nature is less than interesting except for those involved. -- FJV: 06 Dec 2006 |
On Fourth
& Main Bank Building Another
historic designation case history developing REPLY: That is a convoluted situation. The City of Detroit is the property owner, but the site is within the city limits of Huntington Woods (which would benefit from any move of the property back onto the tax base). The Woods has tried to purchase the property. Ethically, if not legally, the Woods is appropriately attempting to designate the golf course historic, but that effort is caught up in legal disputes, including whether even the original; donor's heirs -- if they can be found -- have the right to change the stipulation that the site remain a golf course. I am not anti-historic preservation. I oppose forcing historic designation on an unwilling property owner. For context see Tracking the impact of mandated historic designation -- FJV: 29 Nov 06
|