Landmarks Board seeks longer demolition delay

At the Oct. 17 City Council luncheon, the Landmarks Board asked council members to consider taking steps to further protect Springfield's historic structures.

As an advisory council to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, the Landmarks Board is acting on portions of the historic preservation element of the Springfield Comprehensive Plan, according to Paula Ringer, vice chairman of the board and Midtown representative.

Board members recommend increasing the demolition delay for historic properties and adding a preservation officer to city staff, said Craig Hacker, public-at-large representative, who presented the information on demolition delay to council.

In Springfield, a property on the National Register of Historic Places is not provided with any protection, Ringer said.

"National designation is about increasing visibility and increasing awareness," she said. "It doesn't add protection. There is only a three-day demolition delay."

The local historic property designation gives a structure some protection because it provides a 60-day demolition delay for designated properties, Ringer said.

"Being on the local register helps, but more could be done," she added.

According to Hacker, if a property owner wishes to demolish a structure that is on the local register, the owner must go before the Landmarks Board for a certificate of appropriateness. Then, if the application is denied, Ringer said, there's a 60-day delay before the owner can demolish the structure.

"In those 60 days the public can react to it, think about it, and create options," she said, but the time period isn't long enough to properly consider all the options. "This process takes time. The longer a property can remain standing, the more opportunities can become available for reuse and rehabilitation."

City Council has the option to delay demolition for another 60 days, but often that is still not long enough to find alternatives, Ringer said.

Springfield's policy is out of alignment with other cities of comparable size, Ringer said. In 1997, city staff surveyed 12 like-sized cities in the region and found the demolition delay in these cities ranged from six months to 18 months.

"This is not something unusual we're asking for," Hacker said. "It's very typical in the realm of historic preservation."

Not every demolition should be delayed six months to a year, Hacker added. "This would just give us an opportunity to find another use for the structure, and at the very least, to document the building for the records."

Zone 2 Councilwoman Shelia Wright said she agrees with the need for a longer demolition delay.

"We've lost too many wonderful homes and public buildings," she said. "It's important that we have the time to do the research and to make sure things are done properly."

According to Ringer, many people don't agree that demolition should be delayed more than 60 days. "It depends on what side of the fence you're on," she said. "But if you look at it from the broad community perspective, there's a huge payoff to rehabilitating properties.

As a community, we just need to look at historic preservation differently."

Historic preservation and the economy are not mutually exclusive, she said. "They're fundamentally about the same thing saving scarce resources."

Reusing historic buildings and public infrastructure creates local jobs and uses local materials, Ringer said. "Historic preservation is an effective economic development strategy."

Rather than a quick fix, it is an incremental strategy, she said, "but it leads to a more stable local economy. A building that's rehabilitated is much better for the city than a vacant lot."

According to Hacker, the Landmarks Board also recommended that the city add a full-time historic preservation officer. An officer on city staff could work with nonprofit organizations and community groups to facilitate programs and create new solutions, Ringer said. This staff member could also play a key role in assisting local property owners of nationally registered historic properties who want to rehabilitate and who qualify for a 25 percent state tax credit.

"I think it would be wonderful if we had a historic preservation staff member," Wright said. "It's important to have people in the city whose job involves ensuring that Springfield receives a fair portion of state and federal funding for historic preservation," she said.

In addition, the board reviewed the need for updating and completing a city-wide historical and architectural survey. "It's been 16 years since we've done a survey," Ringer said. "It's a pretty daunting task to do it all, so it will have to be done in segments."

She said that a survey has been proposed for the Grant Beach area. With 11 older urban neighborhoods in the city, there are many properties 50 years old or older, which is why the survey is so important, she said.

"If you don't know what you have, you don't know what you're losing."