The Observation Deck

Betsy Voinovich wrote:I think this about sums it up. It was disturbing at the meeting the other night that the officials representing the City seemed to be holding up their hands saying, "There is nothing we can do!" As if the zoning laws descended from on high and weren't created by city officials themselves, and committees formed by them to serve this city.

If you feel like forwarding your post to the mayor and City Council, you have permission to include my name on the bottom as another citizen who supports this very well-stated point of view.

Betsy Voinovich

Tim Carroll wrote:Here is a question that I can't seem to find an answer:


Why is the building housing the Detroit Theater historic?

Tim Carroll wrote:Here is a question that I can't seem to find an answer:


Why is the building housing the Detroit Theater historic?

Bryan Schwegler wrote:

Tim Carroll wrote:Here is a question that I can't seem to find an answer:


Why is the building housing the Detroit Theater historic?

Great question.

I mentioned this before and I'll say it again, that Lakewoodites often confuse the idea of something actually being a truly historically important building with sentimentality.

It seems that if there are so many historically important buildings that God forbid we ever tear them down despite how outdated or unfeasible they are for new use, that there should be some list of the highly important buildings easily identifiable somewhere right?

People also make the assumption that just because you tear something down automatically means what has to replace it can't fit into the architectural style of Lakewood. There's like this assumption that for some reason new buildings can't be built that fit the style of the city.

The fact is, new construction can very well do that, it happens all the time. Maybe it doesn't happen as much here as it should but I would throw that on the shoulders of the zoning laws and other rules regarding construction and design. Other cities seem to figure this out, not sure why Lakewood can't. If it's important, that needs to happen. But it hasn't seemed important enough for either council nor citizen petition drives to implement. Instead we fumble around being upset any time someone wants to make a change without being able to clearly define what historical really means or even what Lakewood's "style" is.

(c) Considerations for Designation: In considering the designation of any area, place, building, public interior portion of a building, structure, work of art or other object in the City as an HPD or HP, the Commission shall apply the following criteria with respect to each property. One (1) or more or the following must apply:
(1) The character, interest or value as part of the heritage of the City, the region, State of Ohio or the United States
(2) The location as a site of a significant historic event;
(3) The identification with a person or persons who significantly contributed to the historic development of the City;
(4) An HPD's or HP's exemplification of the cultural, economic, social, archeological, or historic heritage of the City;
(5) The portrayal of the environment of a group of people in an era of history characterized by a distinctive architectural style;
(6) The embodiment of distinguishing historical characteristics of a group of people in an era of history characterized by a distinctive architectural style;
(7) HPD's or HP's identification as the work of an architect or master builder whose individual work has influenced the development of the City;
(8) HPD's or HP's embodiment of elements of architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship which represent a significant architectural or technological innovation;
(9) HPD's or HP's unique location or singular physical characteristics representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City, itself at large;
(10) HPD's or HP's having yielded or its likelihood of yielding information important to the understating of pre-history or history.
(d) Additional Considerations for an HPD: In addition to meeting at least one (1) of the above criteria, a proposed HPD must also meet the following criteria in order to be designated an HPD:
(1) The area within the proposed boundaries must have a high degree of historic integrity, without excessive loss of architectural or historic character
(2) The area within the proposed boundaries must have an internal historic cohesiveness in the sense of a shared common history of its inhabitants, historical development according to the Vision, a shared architectural style or design, or a body of architecture illustrating the evolution of architectural styles over a period of time.
(e) Additional Considerations for an HP: In addition to meeting at least one (1) of the criteria listed in subsection (c) above, a proposed HP must also meet the following criteria in order to be designated an HP:
(1) The proposed HP must have a high degree of historic integrity, without excessive loss of architectural or historic character.
(2) The proposed HP must have an internal historic cohesiveness in the sense of a shared common history of its inhabitants, historical development according to the Vision, a shared architectural style or design, or a body of architecture illustrating the evolution of architectural styles over a period of time.
(f) Designation by the Commission: The Commission after obtaining advice from the Heritage Advisory Board may designate certain areas, places, sites, buildings, public interior portions of buildings, structures, works of art and other objects as eligible to become either an HPD or an HP.

Ben VanLear wrote:

Bryan Schwegler wrote:Modern buildings, even those that fit the architectural style of lakewood, are not the same as the originals. I want to preserve at least some of what lakewood was.

Thealexa Becker wrote:I personally see absolutely nothing special about that building, other than it used to be a place to see movies. Distinct facade? Where? It looks like a generic structure.

I never went by that place and went "Wow! Look at that! Isn't that interesting?"

Because it isn't.

So if you are going to argue that we need to keep the building around, perhaps something stronger than, "it's old and interesting!" would be a better standpoint.