Knesek Decision was Rushed
To the Editor:
The issue I have with the decision by the to go ahead with the plan to demolish the iconic old Knesek building in Fayetteville town center, is less with the decision itself than with the high handed manner in which this important matter was presented to the City Council by board representatives of the Fayetteville Community Center (FCC) organization.
According to Mr. Herring, the FCC board president, they have been working for nearly 9 month on various options, before deciding against the original plan for restoration of the building. During which time numerous architects, contractors and engineers were consulted, and various alternatives considered, along with cost repercussions. Yet, from what I gather, during this entire time the Fayetteville Historic Preservation Board (FHPB) was not consulted or even approached before their Oct 26 meeting with the FCC organization, when it was confronted with the request to herewith approve the decision to demolish the old building in favor of a new construction.
As described in the detailed Nov. 24 FCR write-up of the council meeting, a majority of the FHPB voted against the request for a permit to demolish the building in a 3-2 decision, asking specifically for a delay until an opinion can be obtained from a historic preservation engineer, as required by the city’s historic preservation ordinance. Waiving aside this request, barely 4 weeks later, the City Council was asked by the FCC board to reverse the FHPB recommendations. This did not provide any opportunity for the council members to at least consider the decision in light of the due diligence clauses stipulated in the ordinance.
During the meeting, numerous concerns were voiced by several other residents of the community who felt strongly that more efforts should have been expanded before rendering such a far reaching decision, a potentially precedent setting one that will likely affect any future situations that may arise in the Historic District. Waiving aside such concerns and requests for delay by both the FHPB and council members, Mr. Herring, supported by other representatives of the FCC board asked the council to override and FHPB recommendations and issue a permit for the demolition forthwith, arguing against any further delays to allow consideration of specific clauses in the ordinance. The urgency apparently dictated to the council, citing a pressing schedule for a fund raising gala set for February 2024.
For an ambitious project that sets out to be a Community Center in the city, waving aside all the concerns and preferences of members and representatives of the community, represents something of an inauspicious beginning, to say the least. One that can leave lasting divide that is hardly conducive to the kind of good will a community serving project will need in the future. That said, I do understand the considerable efforts undertaken by the FCC over time, and am also duly cognizant that over the four to five year period since the building was acquired, the board itself underwent several changes along the way (for example I found out that the Fayetteville Chamber Music Festival director is no longer a member of the board). However, presenting the issue to the City Council as a “take it or leave it,” without as much as allowing the council members the courtesy of having additional time to consider the decision on the merits, leaves something of a sour taste.As one example, the council could have voted to allow the demolition but with conditions, such as a requiring bond that would guarantee the erection of a new building, thereby protecting the city from unforeseen set-backs that might leave an empty space where the old building stood. Yet, no time allowance was made for this or any other reasonable option.
Personally, having heard the cons and pros, I reckon that had the FHCB been consulted along the way and given a chance to participate adding its own considerations, there is a good chance they would have come to the same conclusion as the FCC board, given the poor state of the building. Such a community input soliciting process would have at least provided enough time for due diligence in weighing the stipulations in the preservation ordinance. I cannot think of a single reason why such consultations were not carried out along the way, and I have heard none during the meeting.