Committee refers amendment to Akron’s historic-preservation code for further discussion

The Planning and Economic Development Committee discussed an ordinance to amend Title 3, Chapter 31 of the Akron Codified Ordinances, which governs the Urban Design and Historic Preservation Commission’s review of alterations, demolitions and environmental changes. The ordinance updates approval guidelines for certificates of appropriateness, replaces a conjunctive "and" test with an "or" test for demolition criteria, removes a contradictory criterion and makes clear that an approval or denial is forwarded to council with appeal rights.

Mister Julian, who presented the measure, said the amendments are intended as a cleanup to correct inconsistent language that previously required meeting all listed demolition criteria. Under the proposed change the commission would have three criteria and need to meet only one before considering demolition—effectively loosening the prior standard that, as written, could be self-contradictory.

Committee members pressed for clarity on how the revised code would apply to historic districts versus individual landmark properties and to "contributing" buildings inside a district. Julian said the ordinance applies both to individual properties designated as local landmarks and to contributing buildings within local landmark districts; he noted that districts typically identify contributing buildings and that local guidance or committees sometimes assist with district-level reviews.

Council Member Sharon Connor asked the staff to provide a list of downtown landmark districts that could be affected and to include information about the historic neighborhood in The Heights. Tina Boyd and others asked whether the change might permit demolition of contributing structures in a district and suggested the language be examined closely by legal staff.

Given the questions and requests for additional detail, the chair recommended, and the committee agreed, to refer the ordinance for further discussion. The referral was seconded and approved by voice vote.

The transcript does not record a roll-call tally; committee members indicated approval by saying "aye." The committee asked staff to return with more information about which downtown districts exist, how contributing buildings are identified, and how the change would operate in practice before the ordinance moves forward.