Historical Preservation Ordinences

The jumping off discussion area for the rest of the Deck. All things Lakewood.
Please check out our other sections. As we refile many discussions from the past into
their proper sections please check them out and offer suggestions.

Moderators: Jim DeVito, Dan Alaimo

dl meckes
Posts: 1474
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Lakewood

Historical Preservation Ordinences

Postby dl meckes » Sun Jul 17, 2005 3:24 pm

Lakewood has the authority to adopt a local ordinance which provides regulations applicable to historic properties and the establishment of historic districts. I'd like to discuss what kind of local historic preservation ordinance would best suit our needs and views. I suggest we think very carefully about what we want to do (rather than simply react). There is no standard model for what an ordinance should contain.

I'd be interested in hearing ideas.
Last edited by dl meckes on Sun Jul 17, 2005 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Hector Lineablanca
Posts: 0
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:55 am

Postby Hector Lineablanca » Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:33 pm

I believe the city government must move deliberately and with great caution on this issue. Here are some questions I would ask.

1---What is the goal of "preservation ordinances"? Do we want to freeze all of Lakewood in time or provide an intelligent roadmap to a communiity that blends old and new initelligently and aesthehtically? Do the residents of Lakewood want to live in an architectural museum?

2----How broad or narrow will these designations be? As Mayor Cain found out with her highly-ridiculed "blight" designations, it's extremely difficult to writie an ordinance that includes ONE Lakewood house or neighborhood that doesn't include nearly ALL of them. Is saving all of Lakewood practical or even desirable?

3----What will the impact on homeowners be? Many Lakewood homes, even historic ones, are not owned by aristocrats, but by middle-class people and many seniors. Ms. Porter's unspeakably distasteful attack on Mr. Lombardo in the other discussion notwithstanding, most peopled didn't buy landmarks, they bought HOMES.

4----Will designations be voluntary? Will they be grandfathered? Who gets to decide what is an interesting old house and what's a building in need of "preservation'? What is the course of appeal if the owner disagrees?

5----If we signficantly curtail an owners right of self-determination regarding changes or even demolition of his property, is that not indeed a "taking" under the 6th Amendment? And are we prepared to offer "just compensation" under the takings clause?

Remember that people are buying houses to live in, not to give their neigbhors something pretty to look at. I believe in strong ordinances regarding mainitenance of property, but I also fear the scale can be tipped too far in the other direction.

Thank you for bringinig up this issue.l


User avatar
Jim O'Bryan
Posts: 14109
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:12 pm
Location: Lakewood
Contact:

Postby Jim O'Bryan » Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:41 pm

Hector Lineablanca wrote:l


Whiteline

While I am honored and glad you have joined us we really need a real name from you.

Thanks


Jim O'Bryan


Stan Austin
Contributor
Posts: 2463
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:02 pm
Contact:

Postby Stan Austin » Sun Jul 17, 2005 7:51 pm

:D "Hector" Good to see ya! We really need your thoughts but Jim is right--- we have to use our real names on this one!
Stan


stephen davis
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:49 pm
Location: lakewood, ohio

Postby stephen davis » Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:10 pm

I have to agree with Whiteline on this one. Council should proceed slowly and deliberately on any legislation regarding these issues. A real plan is significantly better than a knee-jerk reaction.


User avatar
Jim O'Bryan
Posts: 14109
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:12 pm
Location: Lakewood
Contact:

Postby Jim O'Bryan » Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:26 pm

stephen davis wrote:I have to agree with Whiteline on this one. Council should proceed slowly and deliberately on any legislation regarding these issues. A real plan is significantly better than a knee-jerk reaction.


Steve

How on earth can you agree with WHITELINE! You are the most ardent supporter of REAL NAMES and owning comments!

Although I believe Whiteline has much to add to the discusion as long as he hides behind a faux name, the comments mean nothing.

The one thing I am most proud of is that Lakewood residents have put the name wher their mouth and heart is.

To do anything less is simply very weak.


Jim


Cyndie Morgan
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:05 pm

Postby Cyndie Morgan » Mon Jul 18, 2005 3:43 pm

I apologize I am new to Lakewood so I am not familiar with anything that has taken place in the past. Being a lover of old, preserved homes - I tend to move into areas considered historic. I have lived in other states and have always been attracted to areas full of these old, well-kept homes. Prior to moving to Ohio, we considered Rhode Island and Richmond, Virginia - both full of historic homes. Both areas have done a fabulous job of maintaining their historic homes and mansions while progressing with the times. Has anyone, can anyone research what types of ordinances are in other cities that are successful and have similar housing stock?


cyndieinpc
User avatar
Jim O'Bryan
Posts: 14109
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:12 pm
Location: Lakewood
Contact:

Postby Jim O'Bryan » Mon Jul 18, 2005 4:14 pm

Cyndie

How about you doing the homework and writing the article for the paper?

I can hook you up with a bunch of research people that we have onboard, and get you hooked up with some of the movers and shakers in this and othe communities.

Observer writers tend to pick topics they are passionate about, and it is clear this is something that you are passionate about.

So if you would like to write the story drop me a line or call.

Jim O'Bryan



Return to “Lakewood General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests