Firestone Plant #1 will be demolished, while elements of the clock tower and bricks will be saved under an agreement proposed by the City of Akron with the State Historic Preservation Office.
The agreement, approved at an Urban Design and Historic Preservation Commission meeting Tuesday morning, requires the city to salvage portions of the clock tower and create a “historic homage” on the site.
It also requires the initiation of a comprehensive review of the city’s preservation policies and procedures and education for public and staff on preservation practices and standards. Materials related to the building will also be archived at the Library of Congress and local institutions, according to a news release.
The plan still requires state approval for the release of $6 million in Ohio Department of Development funds to demolish the 116-year-old property.
Firestone Plant #1’s fate has been uncertain for some time, with differing proposals discussed since last fall, when the preservation commission first rejected the city’s request to tear down the plant in its entirety.
The city’s original proposal would have preserved the front bay of the building, along with the clock tower, but found that to be economically unfeasible.
The decision was appealed to Akron City Council, which approved the measure, but razing the site would have violated the city’s agreement with the state that granted it $6 million in demolition funds.
A condition of that grant was to preserve the clock tower on the plant’s front facade and incorporate it into a new building.
Information on how the clock elements and other items will be salvaged was not immediately available Tuesday.
Akron Director of Planning Kyle Julien could not be reached for comment.
Could a pocket park be a possibility for the clock tower?
Council Member Donnie Kammer, who represents the Firestone Park area, said in a text to Signal Akron that he was “in favor of preserving anything to do with Firestone Plant #1” and planned to reach out to residents for their opinions.
He said he hoped the clock tower could be saved and added to a pocket park at the location with additional history about the plant and its importance to the surrounding neighborhood.
Firestone Plant #1, the former headquarters of the Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2014, a year after the city designated it a historic landmark.
Leianne Heppner, commission member and the president and CEO of the Summit County Historic Society, supported the agreement’s push for education on historic preservation and local architecture, as well as its requirement for review of policies to prepare for future projects.
In the ‘60s and ‘70s, push for redevelopment often meant razing historic structures, she said — she hoped the commission and her organization could be a resource for preservation education.
“We want to encourage people to preserve historic structures and support the community in easy ways that will make those things possible,” she said.
City’s estimates for environmental mitigation costs disputed
Dana Noel, the advocacy chair for Progress Through Preservation, also wanted to see the city’s history preserved — including Firestone Plant #1.
In comments submitted to the commission ahead of Tuesday’s meeting, Noel said he disputed the city’s high estimates for environmental mitigation of the building and site and alleged that little effort was made by the city to reuse the space.
City estimates put environmental remediation in excess of $8 million to allow for residential use.
“Firestone is a signature property in Akron, and it’s just really a shame to see it being torn down at some point,” he said.
While the plan has yet to be signed off on by the state, Noel said he had little hope the plant could be saved. He pointed to other legacy cities, like Cleveland — and projects within Akron — where industrial buildings were reimagined as housing or mixed-use development, and he questioned why the same could not be done to the plant.
Progress Through Preservation received a matching grant to fund a feasibility study, he said, but the project never gained traction with the city.
“The reality is I don’t think they actually have enough information to make an informed decision,” he said. “Is this the best thing for the community? I don’t know. Maybe after you crunch through all the numbers and do the homework, maybe demolition is the solution. But then again, maybe adaptive reuse [is] the outcome, but they’re not going to know.”
