WVMR --During the Friday June 7th Pocahontas County Special Commission meeting, Commission President Walt Helmick led a discussion about the proposed construction of a courthouse annex.
He said he has given up on the idea of demolishing the old jail building behind the courthouse and building the new judicial courthouse annex on that site.
That project had been stymied because the old jail building is listed on the National Registry of Historic Places.
As Helmick put it: “After a while,” said Helmick, “You realize that you can’t live long enough to get that place off the National Registry of Historic Places.”
Helmick went on to explain that that years ago the county Commission mistakenly and wrongly included the jail on the registry, so now it is time to move on with a new site for the annex, and let the old jail remain and fall down on its own.
He said he and Alan Wright from the Assessor’s office have found a piece of ground to the left of the courthouse and jail just across Judge Street from the courthouse.
The lot contains one run-down old house which will need to be demolished according to Helmick. The property consists of five town lots and he said it will make an ideal spot to build the badly needed new annex.
Helmick led everyone outside to look at the lot, which is located behind -and does not include the big white house on the corner of 10th Avenue and Judge Street.
There does appear to be sufficient room to build a 4,500 to 5,000 square foot annex on it and it appears to be on somewhat higher ground than the courthouse. One problem, Helmick explained, is that there is an undeveloped town right-of-way running right through the middle of the lot. Marlinton Mayor Sam Felton said he would speak to the Town Council and propose that they consider abandoning that short and unused right-of-way.
Helmick also said he will need to examine the new FEMA Flood Map to ensure the lot is above any flood zone, but believes it is. He said those questions would need to be answered before he proposes the commission vote on purchasing of the lot.
The commissioners voted to ask the Marlinton Town Council to abandon their right-of-way through the proposed lots.
Helmick said the owner of the lot is asking $87,000 for the lot, and demolishing the old house there might cost another $10,000, so the total cost appears to be less than $100,000 to purchase and prepare the site. Obviously, this does not include the cost of construction and equipping the annex building.
When Helmick asked for public comment, Jay Miller, the Democratic nominee for commissioner, spoke out. Miller talked about the attempt by then commissioner Rita Griffith 14 years ago to build a courthouse annex.
He said that Martin Saffer and David Flemming, the other commissioners, as well as Dolan Irvine, then the County Assessor didn’t support the Courthouse Annex project, and after much debate and controversy, the annex was rejected in favor of making needed repairs and improvements to the courthouse, which included installing the elevator which is still in use.
Miller also pointed out that there are other ways to maximize the use of space and store records in the courthouse short of building an annex, especially since the population of the county is decreasing.
The fireworks began when Miller said “Now, we have situation where Walt Helmick, with about six months to go in his term, wants to buy a piece of property near the Courthouse, that can be used to start work on his dream of a Courthouse Annex.” That set Helmick off. and he responded with anger, cutting Miller off and accused him of political motives.
Helmick told Miller to ask the other two commissioners how they felt then said: “Whether they buy it or not, I don’t care” Helmick said angerly.
“But I do oppose those kinds of statements made about me after having served 50 years in this county without ever looking at one dime of personal gain for Walt Helmick.”
When Miller tried to respond by talking about the rush Helmick appears to be in to get the annex built, Helmick cut him off, and speaking over him, he told Miller: “Ask the other two what I asked you to ask because I am going to adjourn this meeting pretty dang quick.”
Miller did ask the other commissioners. While Commissioner John Rebinski’s answer seemed to justify the project, Commissioner Jamie Walker appeared to have some reservations, but needed more information.
The meeting was quickly adjourned after that.
-----------------------------------
Potential Benefits of the New Annex Site:
Cost-effective: The passage mentions the total cost of purchasing and preparing the site could be under $100,000, which seems to be a selling point for the project.
Space: The lot appears to have enough space for a 4,500 to 5,000 square foot annex, potentially addressing the courthouse's space constraints.
Higher Ground: Helmick suggests the new site might be on higher ground than the courthouse, possibly mitigating flood risks.
Community Reaction:
The passage doesn't explicitly mention the community's reaction. However, we can glean some possibilities:
Supportive: If the courthouse space limitations are widely known and a new annex is seen as a solution, residents might be supportive.
Opposition:
Jay Miller's comments suggest some residents might oppose the project, especially considering a similar proposal failed 14 years ago.
There could be concerns about spending on a new building while the population declines.
Challenges in Abandoning Right-of-Way:
Marlinton Town Council Approval: The passage mentions needing the Town Council to abandon the right-of-way. This process might involve public hearings or council meetings, potentially causing delays.
Legal Issues: There could be unforeseen legal hurdles in abandoning the right-of-way, especially regarding future access or ownership rights.
Additional Points:
The urgency of the project is unclear. Helmick seems eager but faces opposition and needs to address technicalities before a purchase vote.
The passage hints at potential political motivations as Miller criticizes the timing close to Helmick's term end.
Overall, the decision to build an annex on the new site seems complex. While there might be cost and space benefits, community acceptance and overcoming bureaucratic hurdles are crucial.
----------------------------------------
AI Questions:
It is very difficult to get a historic site removed from the National Register of Historic Places once it has been listed. The process is intentionally rigorous to prevent the loss of significant historic properties. Some key points about delisting a National Register property:- The National Park Service, which administers the National Register, has the sole authority to remove a property from the list. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) cannot unilaterally delist a property
- Properties can only be removed if they no longer meet the criteria for listing, such as if the property has been demolished or has lost its historic integrity through alterations. Simply not wanting the designation is not sufficient grounds for removal
- .
- The owner of the property must submit a formal request for removal to the SHPO, along with documentation demonstrating the property no longer qualifies. The SHPO reviews the request and makes a recommendation to the National Park Service
- .
- The National Park Service then evaluates the request and supporting materials. They may request additional information before making a final decision. The process can take many months
- .
- Even if the property is publicly owned, the National Register listing itself does not prevent the owner from making changes or demolishing the building. However, if federal funding or permits are involved, Section 106 review is triggered which requires consideration of alternatives to avoid or mitigate harm to the historic property
- .
- --------------------------------------------
- The property owner must submit a formal request for removal to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), along with documentation demonstrating the property no longer meets the criteria for listing
- .
There are several legal implications and requirements that must be
followed when delisting a historic site from the National Register of
Historic Places:
.
The property owner must submit a formal
request for removal to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO),
along with documentation demonstrating the property no longer qualifies.
The SHPO reviews the request and makes a recommendation to the National
Park Service, which has sole authority to delist a property .
If federal funding or permits are involved,
Section 106 review is triggered which requires consideration of
alternatives to avoid or mitigate harm to the historic property, even if
it is delisted. The National Register listing itself does not prevent demolition or changes, but other laws may still apply .
If a property is delisted due to procedural
error in the original designation process, it will automatically be
considered eligible for inclusion in the National Register as a National
Historic Landmark without further action .
The National Park Service must provide
written notice of the withdrawal of a National Historic Landmark
designation to the owner(s), appropriate state/local officials, Members
of Congress, and the chief executive of any Indian tribe if applicable
. Delisting would not automatically remove those local protections.
If a locally designated historic property is delisted from the National Register, it may still be subject to the same local historic preservation design review requirements, demolition delay periods, and other zoning restrictions that were in place when it was listed
- Properties designated before December 13, 1980 can only be removed if they no longer meet the criteria for listing due to lost or destroyed qualities. Additional grounds like professional error or prejudicial procedural error do not apply to pre-1980 designations
- .
------------------------------------------------
Delisting a historic site from the National Register of Historic Places does not directly impact local zoning regulations for that property. The key points regarding the relationship between delisting and local zoning are:
Listing on the National Register is primarily honorary and does not automatically restrict what a private property owner can do with their property
. Local zoning regulations are a separate matter controlled by the city/county government.
Many local governments establish historic preservation overlay zones or districts with their own regulations for properties within those areas, regardless of National Register status
Listing on the National Register is primarily honorary and does not automatically restrict what a private property owner can do with their property
. Local zoning regulations are a separate matter controlled by the city/county government.
Many local governments establish historic preservation overlay zones or districts with their own regulations for properties within those areas, regardless of National Register status
. Delisting would not automatically remove those local protections.
If a locally designated historic property is delisted from the National Register, it may still be subject to the same local historic preservation design review requirements, demolition delay periods, and other zoning restrictions that were in place when it was listed
No comments:
Post a Comment