perkins on bank windows

The windows on this building were very attractive and as an historic building the windows definitely should have been retained or at least replaced by an architecturally duplicated style and appearance when the windows were replaced.

The Royal Oak Historic District Commission was derelict in its oversight of the exterior changes being made to this building. The two members who made appropriate suggestions, requests and provided evidence to support their contention that the windows should if replaced be duplicated were totally correct in their stance. They provided the information pertaining to the manufacturers that could and would have been able to supply historically similar products.

Although I too favor the establishment of Historic Districts to be upon approval of the owner, this building should have been and rightfully so, declared an Historic District by the City of Royal Oak, just as Zoning Ordinances establish parameters for buildings. The developers precipitated the establishment by the city of an Historic District on themselves when they wanted MORE at the City Commission meeting that was to finalize the permission to develop.

The windows in this building were as much a part of the historical appearance of the building as the columns and other features. Compare the photograph of the newly constructed Royal Oak Savings Bank building to the current view.

* Perkins has been an active preservationist for decades. Widely known for his book, "Royal Oak, Michigan -- The Early Years" and for his past and ongoing service and membership in preservation-related private and governmental entities, he nevertheless recognizes the validity of the argument that historic designation should be voluntary --as he mentions above, even as he makes his case that the developer might have behaved differently. Perkins's pragmatic approach also showed in his 30 September 1998 memo to the City's Building Facilities Committee, in which he chided the Historic District Commission for ignoring the stated preference of all other historic groups to raze the Starr House garage, Those groups, voluntary and governmental, had opted to use any funds to upgrade the Starr House itself.

In that memo, Perkins reminded all interested parties that, at his instigation, "four prominent Royal Oak Citizens (Robert L. Dondero, Stephen Jones, Philip Miller, and William Sullivan)" purchased the property, which was later purchased by the City. "It is the house and not the garage on this property for which the property was designated an historic district." (boldface his)

Earlier Comment:
The Fourth and Main Bank Building seems well on its way to becoming a quasi-permanent boarded up eyesore. The immediate cause seems to be the granting or not of a liquor license to a proposed tenant. The real cause is that the City Commission issued a 6-month historic district study-recommended moratorium on the property, then added a second 6-month moratorium, effectively “taking” a piece of property because a handful of preservationists are in love with some deteriorating faux-Greek pillars. [UPDATE: A compromise of sorts was reached in that only the pillared corner structure had to be maintained historical. As this is update is written (November 2003), the Historic Commission and the developer are arguing over how the windows of that corner must be treated.]

It is difficult not to conclude that what some tout as a love for historic preservation is really a gut-level anti-development mindset. We’ll know soon, when we see who comes out screaming against two or three new proposed developments: a condo/parking structure across from the Post Office, the former Marshall Fredericks studio, a possible hotel on Washington.