Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Demolition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pensacola ARB imposes 60-day demolition delay on 524 West Romana
Summary
Faced with limited documentation from the absentee owner, the board found potential historic significance and imposed a 60-day demolition delay to allow time for preservation interest or salvage options.
The Pensacola Architectural Review Board voted to impose a 60-day demolition delay on a house at 524 West Romana after members said the structure may be one of the few remaining examples of its neighborhood’s early-20th-century development.
Staff told the board the application triggers review under the city’s historic building demolition review ordinance because the house is more than 50 years old and appears potentially significant. The ordinance requires the board to determine whether the building meets the National Register of Historic Places criteria for significance; if so, the board may impose a demolition delay of up to 60 days to allow preservation or rehabilitation efforts to surface.
Ross, a board member who researched the property’s history, said he found references to the house as early as April 24, 1907, and described it as part of an early neighborhood cluster. “Earliest mention of the house is April 24, 1907 … the house and surrounding houses were being used as rental properties,” Ross said, summarizing his archival review.
Planning staff said the property owner is not local and did not attend the meeting; staff also said the applicant supplied no additional interior or structural documentation. Staff reminded applicants that they “can and should provide additional photographs, interior, exterior, structural, anything they have,” but that many applicants do not. The lack of structural information and the owner’s absence were factors in the board’s deliberations.
A resident, Angie Miller, identified herself as a Pensacola native, an interior designer and an HOA board member, and told the board she has renovated a similar old house in the area. “A lot of that wood was petrified. It was in fabulous shape … we were able to restore it,” Miller said, offering to help contact contractors and prepare cost estimates for potential purchasers.
Board members expressed concern about demolition by neglect and the loss of a relatively rare surviving house in that neighborhood. One member said if the building is salvageable it could be moved, as similar houses have been relocated in the past.
After an initial motion to postpone for 30 days, a board member modified the motion at the meeting and proposed a 60-day delay to allow interested parties time to investigate renovation, salvage or purchase. The motion was seconded and the board voted in favor; the chair announced the 60-day delay was imposed.
Outcome: Motion to postpone demolition for 60 days passed. The board asked that members of the public who might be interested in rehabilitation or relocation contact the owner and the board’s staff within the delay period.
The record shows the owner was not present at the meeting and no replacement plans were submitted; staff said replacement plans are only required for contributing structures inside a preservation district.
