Summary
The Euclid Architectural Review Board approved removal of a bell tower at Noble Academie Utd’s 1200 East 200th Street campus but continued review of paint, window infill, stair removal and landscaping until full documentation is provided.
The Euclid City Architectural Review Board voted Wednesday to approve removal of a bell tower at Nobel Academie Utd, 1200 East 200th Street, while continuing consideration of broader exterior changes including painting, tuckpointing, closing a redundant door and removal of an exterior stair.
The board’s action cleared the tower for demolition on the condition that any masonry exposed by removal be patched and repaired “to match adjacent surfaces from the foundation to the coping,” language adopted in the motion approved by the board. The board continued the remainder of the applicant’s requests for further documentation and drawings before taking any approvals on those items.
The move matters because the project touches a nearly 100-year-old school building on a visually prominent site and would change its street-facing appearance. Board members said they were willing to allow removal of the tower now for safety reasons but want drawings, material samples and a landscaping plan for the other work before authorizing it.
At a public hearing, Dr. Gertag Yalvik, principal of Nobel Academie Utd, described the school’s condition and the school board’s recent investment in new facilities. “Last year, our school board invested $2,800,000 to build a new gym,” Dr. Yalvik said, and added that the bell tower sits next to the new gym and appears fragile, which is why the school is requesting removal. She said the applicant intends to reuse the tower’s brick where possible and to close an unused exterior doorway to create an additional classroom.
A city planning staff member told the board the project’s scope had expanded since the application packet was prepared. Staff reported that drawings in the packet showed only the rear painting and the bell tower removal, but more recent on-site work indicated the front stair and door area was being altered and ground-mounted central air units that were previously hidden by the stair would become exposed. The staff member recommended the board treat most of the hearing as conceptual and withhold final approvals until the applicant submits detailed documentation.
Board members pressed the applicants and contractor on details the board will require for final approval, including: - documentation of the materials and method to repair masonry once the tower is removed, including replacement of the coping (the stone piece at the top of the wall) to match the adjacent wall; - photographic and drawing evidence of the condition behind the tower so the board can evaluate patching versus larger repairs; - a landscaping plan and planting schedule for the area left by the tower; - drawings showing how the proposed infill of an exterior door and demolition of exterior stairs will be handled, specifically how the design will conceal or screen the ground-level mechanical units that will be exposed when stairs are removed; and - color samples and renderings for any proposed painting of brick elevations, including a clear statement of which elevations would be painted (the board expressed reluctance to paint historically finished brick without detailed justification and samples).
Board members said they were generally willing to allow the tower removal sooner than the rest of the work because the school reported the tower was unsafe. “If the board sees fit, based on the documents that you do have, which do show what is happening there, I’m not opposed to that to help them move forward,” a board member said during deliberations. The board emphasized, however, that final approval for painting, window infill, stair removal and landscape screening will require submittal of complete plans, material samples and any necessary building-department or fire-marshal approvals.
During the meeting contractor Mustafa Dumas and office manager Ashley Alvarenga represented the school; the school’s architect did not attend. The board asked that the applicant and its architect return with documentation at least one week before the next scheduled meeting and with landscape quantities and plant types identified.
The board’s conditional approval applies only to the bell tower removal and the requirement to patch exposed masonry to match the adjacent wall from foundation to coping. The board continued the remainder of case 2025ARB17 for further review.
