Historic Preservation? Be afraid, be VERY afraid!

[Gary Rice]

The topic has come up regarding historic preservation of our classic housing stock.

On the face of it, the idea sounds like a no-brainer. There are a number of pecuniary inducements for Lakewood, as a community, and for us as individuals, to keep our houses in good shape- and with a nod to tradition, since many of our homes are, or soon will be, century homes.

Having said that, several years ago, in the wake of the West Nile scare, my family wanted to install some simple clip on/off porch screens, along with new porch columns and railings, for the benefit of my parents. Before I knew it, I had to go before the Archetectural Review Board with a proposal and plans.

We had to begin a very public negotiations process as to types of railing and columns to put up, and whether screens could be put up, and how.

And this was for OUR, paid-for home!

In disgust, we withdrew our request, and thought about moving.

Mom was very upset by all this. She died soon afterwards.

I was tempted at that time to paint our white house with black prison stripes, to reflect living in what, to me, had become a miniature police state.

But times pass, administrations change, and now? Here I am helping to make Lakewood better. Still, if you don't want some committee approving your every home design change, I would suggest that you take a hard look, before approving historic preservation-type neighborhoods.

[ryan costa]

What are the advantages of having homes declared historic preservation-types?

[Gary Rice]

Hi Ryan,

Good to hear from you.

Historic preservation helps keep the community attractive and nice. It makes for an interesting, valuable and photogenic place to live.

Possibly at the price of personal freedom, regarding your home.

My point however is this. Say you buy a '57 Chevy. To use the same analogy if it were a house, you'd have to let the city oversee whether you modified it, painted it, or whether or not you put racing stripes on it.

My point? My car, my house. I do what I want with it cosmetically, and whenever I decide to do so. That's the ideal anyway, within reason.

Although I do understand very well where some people might take advantage of this freedom, I'd still rather have that freedom to decide those things for myself.

[c. dawson]

It's a slippery slope ... because some home owners will be "it's my house, and I'll do with it what I want," and then tear it down and put up an ultra-modern monstrosity that doesn't share any architectural heritage with the other houses, and is an eyesore ... then the neighbors are irritated and embarrassed. Geez, go into Ohio City, on Bridge Avenue, there's a couple of "remuddling" jobs where the beautiful 1800s homes have been transformed into strange 1970s sci-fi houses. And there's certainly examples here in town where people took their grand front porch, and enclosed it ... and it's royally ugly.

And while it's not a big harm, it does mar the look of the neighborhood, and in a city that takes pride of its historic housing stock, it can be detrimental. So what to do? On one hand, it would be great to keep the neighborhoods looking good (though I think keeping up with absentee landlords is more important than historic preservation), but on the other hand, I agree that Lakewood has very unique housing stock and should do what it can to preserve that. But the effort should be voluntary, with strong support from the city and the Cleveland Restoration Society. The city's already done some good things, like publishing online documents about how homeowners should take care of their houses, but I think there should be more workshops available at the library and other venues about these historic houses ... researching their history, maintaining their looks and appeal, but modernizing them sympathetically (updating them while not doing so in a visually unaesthetically way), and exploring resources for homeowners to do so. Because trying to restore these houses, or even put vintage or retro fixtures onto them, tends to be expensive. A group like the Cleveland Restoration Society would recommend I tear off my aluminum siding and restore the wood siding. Nice idea ... but it's a tad expensive. Same for replacing the new vinyl windows put in by a previous owner and replacing them with wood-framed windows. No, I don't think so. But I will work on my porch to spruce it up, and I'd like to replace the ugly storm door in front with a nice old-fashioned wooden screen door, and I'm slowly working to replace the ugly 1960s light fixtures with ones that are more appropriate to the house's age and architecture (albeit modern versions of old-style light fixtures). But plenty of homeowners wouldn't bother. And they shouldn't be forced, but perhaps encouraged, and given advice on what to do, and how to do it (which gets back to an earlier thread about workshops in home repair and maintenance, a "tool library" and other resources which might be ultimately more valuable).

Yes, it's "my house and I'll do what I want to it," but it's also true that your house was there before you existed ... and if you treat it right, it'll be there long after you're gone. It's your house ... right now. Before, it was someone else's house ... and someone else's house before that. And it'll be someone else's house after you. Owners come and go ... the house stays. So we should encourage homeowners to be good caretakers of their house's long history, but work to ensure that it'll last into the future.

I love history, and have been a professional historian/museum curator for years, but it's not something that can be forced, nor should it be forced. Education is the most important thing. Get out there and show people the value of these historic houses, made with real wood (instead of wood products made out of glue and sawdust), many with amazing craftsmanship, and often more liveable than a cookie-cutter McMansion out in the far 'burbs. Give people pride in their place of living, and I think you'll find more people willing to really take care of their investments!

[Chris Trapp]

c. dawson,
just wanted to say 'nice posting'!
chris

[Gary Rice]

C. Dawson

I'll second Chris' posting. Nicely thought out response. There are many things that the city can do, and has done so far, to encourage residents to take pride in the gorgeous rare quality of workmanship (or should it be "workpeopleship" today?) that marks a Lakewood home.

This quality can be seen with just about any home, on just about any street in Lakewood. Truly there are so many homes these days, that do seem to be looking better all the time.

I do think that the City is doing a good job accentuating the positive, under Mayor George's administration.

Dawson's thought that the work needs to be voluntary though, underscores the main point of this posting. When well-meaning people, appointed by local government, attempt to influence the type of columns I put up, or the type of railings I prefer...that, to me, steps over the line.

Government should have nothing to do with cosmetic preferences, at least in my view.

We know that there will always be arguments balancing the good of the whole, against the rights of the individual, in any community.

We would do well to remember, however, that time not so long ago, when politicians attempted to use the designation "blight" to destroy some of our beautiful homes. Politicians too, would do well to remember what became of their utopian west side dream.

Either we allow private property, or we don't, but if we do, I own it- thank you, and I'll do with it as I please, within reason of course. (I might not put in a driving range, for example, but I'd think about horseshoe pits)

Having said all this however, lets continue to encourage all Lakewood residents to take pride in their homes, without coercion.

[Stan Austin]

c.dawson--- Good post. You've laid out a pretty good summary of the importance of maintaining and adhering to original concepts when repairing or upgrading.

However, just to show how this can get complicated, I'm going to throw a curve in here.

I feel safe in saying that most of us agree that saving our environment has to be a priority. The City has in fact recognized this principle by adopting Green building principles whenever it can and requiring the same of private builders.

However, many times Green building principles require that materials used be made of recycled materials which means that the end product many times would fall under your definition of fake or non original.

The point that I am making is that by our pursuit of "good goals" we have to recognize that there are going to be seemingly contradictory paths that will have to be reconciled.

I know it can be done with good public discussion. I would hope that when the Planning Commission takes up this matter that you and Gary and the rest of us attend and present the various viewpoints.

Stan Austin

[Gary Rice]

Stan,

Does this mean that continually running urinal at Lakewood Park would have to be replaced by one made of recycled papier-mache'?

[Michael Fleenor]

Gary:

While I appreciate your concern, I'd like to offer a different perspective. I personally am extremely pleased to see the city pursuing local historic districts. When I moved to Northeast Ohio seven years ago to work for the Cleveland Restoration Society, my first choice would have been to live in an historic district--I looked at Ohio City, Tremont, and Franklin-West Clinton Historic Districts in Cleveland; at Fairmount and Forest Hill in Cleveland Heights, and in Shaker Heights. Ultimately--we found the best combination of historic houses and walkable commercial districts right here in Lakewood. I dare say if I went around my neighborhood--Clarence, Grace, Cohasset--most folks around here would welcome an historic designation because people are attracted to this neighborhood because of the great building stock.

To address some of your concerns about historic district designation. No one is saying that the entire city should be an historic district (although the whole city would qualify). Typically, a local designation is placed where the residents want it. As part of a designation, you create local design guidelines. In some neighborhoods, vinyl siding is allowed, but new construction ande demolitions are reviewed, in others the design review committee (made up of local residents who live in the district) even review color. In most, the guidelines are somewhere in between--do anything you want inside, choose any paint color you wish (paint is reversible), but you have roofing, siding, windows reviewed, as well as dormers and additions. My point is this is not a one-size-fits-all process. It is tailored in each case to local needs. A huge advantage of the additional review is that it elevates the design. Nobody spoils a house on purpose. Most folks have good intentions, yet the unique features you find in an historic house or building are economic assets. When you choose to remove an asset from your house, you are taking it away from the neighborhood as well. We all have a responsibility to one another. I might want to put a pick-up truck up on blocks in my front yard and let a few hounddogs live under the porch, but I can't do that even though it is my personal property because I'm part of a larger commmunity. In Cleveland, Cudell Improvement worked to get a local designation on Clifton-West Blvd. specifically to make sure owners (many of whom are absentee landlords) do the appropriate things to their properties. To me, the improvement on Cleveland's part of Clifton has been obvious. From what I understand, it has also made it a more desirable rental market attracting better tenants.

Any preservation ordinance that is passed must have due process--an opportunity to present your case and be heard and it must have some concessions for economic hardship. I sit on the design review committee for Ohio City and we have approved numerous vinyl siding permits over the years. There is just a little more care taken in considering the need, the applicant's other options, and making resources available to them to make the best (read not only most attractive but also most economical for the long-term) decisions.

Local historic designation tends to increase investment because it provides an added sense of security. The neighborhood I lived in in Nashville before moving to Lakewood was considered inner-city, but it got rediscovered because of it's unique architecture and being a local district. It is now one of the most popular neighborhoods in the city. In the last seven years working for the Cleveland Restoration Society, I've seen Cleveland's historic districts get more and more popular. These neighborhoods are not only attracting historic rehabs (like the infamous Jay Hotel into upscale lofts), but they also tend to attract more new construction than other neighborhoods that are not historic districts even though the investor might be forced to endure design review.

I also can't tell you how many former Lakewoodites I have worked with through CRS who are now living in Cleveland because they wanted to live in an historic district. We worry about losses to Avon, but it goes both ways.

I applaud the Mayor and Planning Staff because I think the ability to create historic zoning disitricts is one more tool that we will have available to keep Lakewood vibrant and to increase its popularity.

[Shawn Juris]

Is this the 1st ring suburb's version of a homeowner's association?

[Gary Rice]

Michael,

First of all, I sincerely appreciate your taking the time to respond to my thread, and to do so in such an eloquent and persuasive manner.

I also applaud your appreciating that there would be individual difficulties to work out, a recognition of the need for due process, and your expression that your particular part of Lakewood would make a great district. You have some beautiful homes in that area, as you well know.

My experience with the Architectural Review Board however, (in a time of serious crisis for my family), was not a good one.

All that my dear late mother really wanted, was to sit on her temporarily screened-in porch without fear of sickness or death from West Nile.

There were, and are many screened-in porches in Lakewood. What would have been the issue with one more?

And who is to say that a screened-in porch is worse than one that is not? Who is to say that my (now fairly rare) aluminum siding is less classic than someone's original, but much more more dangerous, asbestos-containing siding? Or someone's lead paint?

Who is to say that canary yellow is more offensive than pastel? Or that my white, with black trim, is less attractive than tri-tone blends?

My dad felt that he did not participate in WWII, to have someone dictate the columns on his porch, or the color of his house! Even Hitler did not dare go so far!

To sum it up Michael, it would appear that there is a continuum:

We - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Me

Where the line falls on this continuum, will no doubt determine whether people continue to feel pride of ownership, or like tenant farmers.

Oh yes, the hound dogs and the pickup up on blocks? My family came from Appalachia, so I know a thing or two about that as well. We were mountain people who, centuries ago, ran from the collective "we", because of the oppression that this word contained for anyone who could not walk the goose step.

There was a reason that the pickup was on blocks, and a reason for the dogs under the porch too. Go too close to that house, and an unwelcome stranger would find out why.

[DougHuntingdon]

the first ring's suburb version of a homeowners association is the many condominium associations that exist in Lakewood.

Historic designations are a double edged sword. In Hudson, you cannot put a fence in your yard unless it was grandfathered in or unless you live in certain parts. If you get a dog, you have to have an underground fence (or so I am told by Hudson residents). You also have to be extremely careful when putting even one single drop of paint on the exterior of your home.

imo you should be able to make your home any style, any color, etc., but you should not be allowed to make it a dump with trash in the yard, broken windows everywhere, and SNOW ALL OVER THE SIDEWALK!!! I think once we in Lakewood get the white trash from acting like they are on Gerry Springer, the black hoodlums from acting like gangsters, the noisy people from being too noisy, and families with 10 kids all properly control their children, THEN we can worry about any home renovations fitting in with the proper historic architecture.

Doug

PS I haven't noticed...have they torn down the Hall House yet?

[Kate McCarthy]

Is there any appeals process allowed with the architectural review board in the same way that adjoining properties are allowed a yea or nay for code variances? I think that might be a way to allow for a temporary change to a property to accommodate the owner (like a wheel chair ramp) that wouldn't permanently alter the property. I agree that I don't want to live in a Hudson like atmosphere. And that runs very contrary to the Lakewood spirit (no one is going to tell any neighbor of mine that they can't have a cow mail box!). But I think architectural review of structural changes is very important. I know of one very nice house for sale with saleability extremely limited by the terribly altered house next door. The porch has been enclosed and there are any number of dormers protruding through the roof. The presence of this altered house really does degrade the value of the surrounding properties.

I've long felt that the tension in Gary's we --- me continuum is probably most emblematic of Lakewood than any other. When I heard from a co-worker that in Shaker Heights you are not allowed to hang laundry outside I was thrilled that I lived in a community where I can still sleep on fresh air dried sheets. But I also cringe at some of the awful alterations that the city has allowed in prior years to our housing stock. It's terribly difficult to find where one draws the line.

[dl meckes]

This is a civic conversation that is absolutely imperative. There are no hard rules in place.

While the idea of personal freedom is something I think we all feel strongly about, in fact, there are limits to freedom in nearly every aspect of our lives.

Because we live in a city and we are crowded together, we probably have fewer personal freedoms than rural dwellers.

When it comes to our homes, what we may or may not do is heavily regulated. Have you ever really looked at the number of permits required to do any work on your home? It's an eye opener.

I think there are a lot of positive aspects to the local historic designations but I also have the fear of "paint nazis." I agree with Grace that I want to be able to hang laundry outside if I so choose. Perhaps it isn't the best idea to hang my laundry out in the front yard or along the stairway of an apartment building.

How much power do we want to give to an overseeing board or commission of our fellow citizens? What kinds of guidlines would be acceptable and what would be too restrictive? What appeal process?

Gary's experience sounds terribly frustrating and it sounds like a failure on many levels. I wish that there had been a way for Gary's porch project to have been worked out to everyone's satisfaction. I can't imagine why there could be no meeting of the minds.

I have seen the more recent iterations of the ARB work with people so they can move a project forward and I'd like to think that would be the goal for any oversight board.

Michael Fleenor informs us that different boards have different standards, so it sounds like the community is going to have to help determine what we want.

[Gary Rice]

Sorry folks,

I remain unconvinced, though I appreciate your postings.

The fact remains that if you give ANY arbitrary architectural or cosmetic oversight to a committee, you will have no assurance they will stop, where you want them to.

Sooner or later, they will come for you, and for your particular expression of individuality.

The cow mailbox will go, the rainbow and flower flags will go, the sheets flapping in the wild wind will go, your choice of porch light will go, and you will all be vassals to a new and insidious version of the "castle on the hill".

I know, I've been there, and that's why I'm sounding the clarion call.

I seem to remember in Urban Studies, that, where people are not empowered to look after their own properties, alienation, hostility, and decline soon follow.

Think about it, a few citizens are appointed to pass summary judgment on how the rest of us should LOOK.

Perhaps you have the money, or think that your "nice" house would never come under scrutiny...or that you could fix it if it did.

Just remember that fines, imprisonment and court costs can await you, should you lose a job, fall on hard times, and someone thinks you need a certain kind of window, or lattice work. or railing or?????

I see chains upon you all.