Popular Searches
Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Share
Union Free School building facing demolition or restoration
 |
| The Union Free School Building in New Lebanon. (Marcia Mayper photo) |
By Paul Crossman
NEW LEBANON — There have been several times over the last few decades when the issue of demolishing the Union Free School building in New Lebanon had been considered and it seems that demolition of the historic structure is once again being considered. According to New Lebanon Central School District Superintendent Karen McGraw, the school board has been looking at what to do with the building, which is currently condemned, and is considering two separate paths: demolition or restoration.
“At this point the ball is rolling in two separate courts,” said McGraw. “I personally think we should preserve historic buildings when practical, I’m just not sure where we are on this issue. … We’re talking about nearly 40 years of neglect.”
The subject was broached at the school board meeting Nov. 4, when more than 10 concerned residents and members of the Lebanon Valley Historical Society attended and made a case that the building has historical significance and should be restored. They added that if the building was restored, it could make a great community center for the town.
Christine Dreyfus of the historical society said that prior to the meeting she was extremely worried about the situation because it had seemed to her that the board was planning on demolishing the building and had already made up their minds. Her opinion changed after attending the meeting. She said it became apparent that several members of the board, at least, were open to other suggestions.
“We were led to believe that the school was going to be demolished,” she told the Chatham Courier, “but once we presented our argument to the board they were quite receptive.”
Dreyfus and fellow community members were also pleased with the fact that no decision was made on the subject and that the board was willing to take the time and look into various possibilities for the building, as well as figure out what’s best for the community.
“No decision was wonderful,” she said. “We were afraid a decision had already been made.” She added that what the historical society was really requesting was more time to research funding for the topic, as well as find out if the residents of New Lebanon as a whole would even be open to such an extensive renovation project.
Though it is illegal to tear down a building listed on the National Historic Registry, the old school’s condemned state makes it eligible to be taken off the list. According to McGraw, the board has already contacted the New York state Department of Preservation to determine what it would take to get permission to demolish the structure.
She did say, though, that if the historical society can come up with a feasible — and monetary — means of restoring the building, then it would definitely be something the board would be willing to look into.
“The local historical society is interested in renovation,” said McGraw, “but money needs to be associated with that interest … to keep the building safe and ultimately renovate it.”
To this extent, Dreyfus and fellow historical society members are looking into a number of grants from several different sources which would help pay for some or all of the cost of restoration. They had already received a small matching grant in 2006 for a second expert opinion on whether it would be possible to restore the building and the response was positive.
The society has been a key proponent of keeping the building from demolition in the past, both in 1991, when a similar proposal was considered, and in 2005, when asbestos abatement was done in the building, making it safe to either tear down or restore.
McGraw said that the board has no real timeline for the project — in whichever direction it may lead — and that it might be a while, since both the historical society and the NYS Department of Preservation need time to gather information.
“It probably won’t be back on the board’s agenda until we have information on both possibilities,” she said.
“At this point the ball is rolling in two separate courts,” said McGraw. “I personally think we should preserve historic buildings when practical, I’m just not sure where we are on this issue. … We’re talking about nearly 40 years of neglect.”
The subject was broached at the school board meeting Nov. 4, when more than 10 concerned residents and members of the Lebanon Valley Historical Society attended and made a case that the building has historical significance and should be restored. They added that if the building was restored, it could make a great community center for the town.
Christine Dreyfus of the historical society said that prior to the meeting she was extremely worried about the situation because it had seemed to her that the board was planning on demolishing the building and had already made up their minds. Her opinion changed after attending the meeting. She said it became apparent that several members of the board, at least, were open to other suggestions.
“We were led to believe that the school was going to be demolished,” she told the Chatham Courier, “but once we presented our argument to the board they were quite receptive.”
Dreyfus and fellow community members were also pleased with the fact that no decision was made on the subject and that the board was willing to take the time and look into various possibilities for the building, as well as figure out what’s best for the community.
“No decision was wonderful,” she said. “We were afraid a decision had already been made.” She added that what the historical society was really requesting was more time to research funding for the topic, as well as find out if the residents of New Lebanon as a whole would even be open to such an extensive renovation project.
Though it is illegal to tear down a building listed on the National Historic Registry, the old school’s condemned state makes it eligible to be taken off the list. According to McGraw, the board has already contacted the New York state Department of Preservation to determine what it would take to get permission to demolish the structure.
She did say, though, that if the historical society can come up with a feasible — and monetary — means of restoring the building, then it would definitely be something the board would be willing to look into.
“The local historical society is interested in renovation,” said McGraw, “but money needs to be associated with that interest … to keep the building safe and ultimately renovate it.”
To this extent, Dreyfus and fellow historical society members are looking into a number of grants from several different sources which would help pay for some or all of the cost of restoration. They had already received a small matching grant in 2006 for a second expert opinion on whether it would be possible to restore the building and the response was positive.
The society has been a key proponent of keeping the building from demolition in the past, both in 1991, when a similar proposal was considered, and in 2005, when asbestos abatement was done in the building, making it safe to either tear down or restore.
McGraw said that the board has no real timeline for the project — in whichever direction it may lead — and that it might be a while, since both the historical society and the NYS Department of Preservation need time to gather information.
“It probably won’t be back on the board’s agenda until we have information on both possibilities,” she said.
Share this Article
 |
||
| Price Chopper wants to expand, but needs water/sewer hookup |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of registerstar.com.
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
