Heritage News * of Chillicothe, Ross County & South-Central Ohio

As the Zimaroy Downs House at 53 West 4th Street was being demolished, a little too much was torn down. The owner, the First Baptist Church, had agreed to the Design Review Board to leave the front porch intact when they were given permission to destroy the house. This was an agreement the church had worked out with the Chillicothe Conservancy, and had also discussed with me.

Yet, somehow demolition did not stop at the front porch. It continued, removing the porch roof, side porte cochere (carriage porch), and the tops of some of the arches. Supposedly this was happening in view of church members. It was also in view of a neighbor, who immediately called the city. City Engineer Tom Day came out and issued a stop work order to halt the demolition. So far, neither the demolition contractor (Gillum's) nor the church has admitted whose fault the overextended demoliton was.

I have written previous articles on the situation of the house. In April, I wrote about parts of the house being saved before its demolition. In January, I wrote that the Zimaroy Downs House was set to be demolished this January, as approved by the Design Review Board. In June of 2005, I wrote that this high-style architect-designed house built in the mid-1890s is one of Chillicothe's landmark houses - and its owner is seeking permission for demolition June 16th.

Below are my notes on conversations at the Design Review Board meeting on July 20th, 2006; notes from letters sent after that meeting; and notes from the Design Review Board meeting on August 17th. I encourage my readers to make your own conclusions about who is acting responsibly in this process.

The condition of the porch remnant and the safety factor was a topic of discussion at the July 20th, 2006 Design Review Board meeting:

City Engineer Tom Day said he had issued the stop order to figure things out. He met with two church trustees, and agreed to let the rest of the demolition to continue. He and Building Inspector Kelly Kight inspected the remaining arches and had concerns that two of them had serious cracks, and proposed removing the brickwork to the "soldier course" of brick. He said the mortar joints are open, so they would need to be rebuilt anyhow. He wanted as much brick as possible salvaged.

[In other words, he wanted at least two of the arches temporarily demolished. The "'soldier course' of brick" is at the bottom of the arches.]

Pastor of the First Baptist Church, the Reverend McReynolds, was present and representing the church. He said he was shocked when he was notified that the city had stopped demolition because everything was being destroyed. But, he said, when you are demolishing a building, you have to expect other factors. The church had bought the building because snakes and possums were in the house, and the church was concerned about the streetscape. He wanted to address misquotes that said the church was putting a parking lot there. Rather, the church will build a new addition. He requested a modification of the porte cochere because it was too narrow.

Design Review Board president Joe Molnar said that the original concern was to shore up the arches. What happened is what he thought could happen.

The Reverend McReynolds said he had experts look at the porch, and had an agreement with the demolition contractor that if it seemed unsafe he would contact the church. He felt that he has great integrity with the Design Review Board, especially on working with them on the planned addition. The church is having the part of the house closest to the church demolished by hand at great expense.

President Molnar said that the original agreement must be maintained, and that the DRB must have a written request for alteration of plans. He asked, will the church will put the porch back in the same condition?

The Reverend McReynolds said he wanted the city to show what is unsafe. He also proposed a new arch design from the ground up in the church addition, and had concerns about the foundation. The bricks would match the church, be new materials, and better for public safety.

President Molnar replied that that was not in the agreement, and that the church must restore with the existing brick. In his opinion, shoring up of the arches could have prevented this problem.

The Reverend McReynolds said it would be ok to use the old brick.

DRB member Ron Bettin said he agreed with President Molnar. The brick needs to be saved and kept from scavenging. There is a need to stabilize the arches, but minimal work. He doesn't want to wait for a new building to see the arches reconstructed. He also recommended a performance bond.

DRB member Terry Leonard jumped in, saying "hold on!" She was waiting to hear a glowing reccomendation from Mr. Bettin, the same as he gave for the St. Mary Church application to replace the windows in the St. Mary's Convent. She said they will do what is neccesary to conform. There is an implication that the church intended to ignore the decision.

President Molnar said no, they want to go back to the decision.

The Reverend McReynolds said he has a sense of responsibility and is concerned for the streetscape - he doesn't want to see the Gazette's dumpsters from the sidewalk. He wants the best result. Isn't it in the hand of the City Engineer for what is unsafe?

Mr. Bettin said what was agreed needs to be followed

The Reverend McReynolds asked that if there is a problem with the foundation, it must be dug up and replaced?

The house back in 1991, while still occupied by Ross County.

DRB member Ceil Corcoran said she was not sure why Reverend McReynolds needed to be here - the situation is between the church and city engineer. What was presented to us was a collaboration between the church and the Conservancy. The bottom line is, we let the building go...So four years later we can see the arches and say we lost the building but saved the arches.

The Reverend McReynolds said the sole reason he is here is because the city is concerned for safety...

Mr. Bettin said whatever you do, you must rebuild.

The Reverend McReynolds said yes, and we are here to present a phased plan for demolition and new construction.

President Molnar said that if you need to make changes, come back.

series of arches along the front porch

Plans called for the arcaded front porch to remain.

DRB member Dustin Proehl said that we talked long about keeping the arches. But, for whatever reason, they're gone. Another member said "no." Mr Proehl continued, ok, they're not gone. He resents the allegation that it was done on purpose. He wants the neighborhood to look good, but not a hodgepodge. If the city says they need to be torn down, then he would like to see a new plan.

A member of the audience spoke up (I did not get her name). She said that she was the one who called. She stood there all weekend and watched. She talked to Gillum who said they were going to keep the arches. But she saw Gillum take the top of the arch off and the roof, and that it would be all gone if she weren't there.

President Molnar said that they were not going to get a resolution tonight.

The Reverend McReynolds said understanding that, we will work with the city engineer.

President Molnar said that was enough.

The Reverend McReynolds said that the church went way beyond to confer on the project, and that the integrity of the church has been questioned.

...And, that was the July discussion.

Zimeroy F. Downs House on a Sunday midday, February 20th this year.

A letter from Chillicothe Building Official Kelly Kight to the First Baptist Church on August 8th was a follow-up to a meeting of Mr. Kight and church representatives July 26th. In it, Mr. Kight stated that he found

five of the six smaller arches and the main entrance...to be heavily damaged and that they need to be removed. Because of structural concerns, the arches and portico need to be removed to the "soldier course" of brick on the columns. It is not permissible to remove any of the structure below that level.

In an August 16th letter from Franklin Conaway of the Chillicothe Conservancy to the First Baptist Church, Mr. Conaway wrote that the Conservancy had offered to assist in developing a plan to retain the arches. He said that architectural drawings should be made to plan that out, and that the Conservancy was told a year ago that the church was going to do that. The Conservancy has been prepared to help to do that, but the church has not requested their help. Mr. Conaway also wrote that the Conservancy belives there is a viable option to dismantling the arches.

The topic again came up for discussion at the August 17th Design Review Board meeting:

Chillicothe Conservancy representative David Carroll restated the Conservancy's contention that the arches could be stabilized as they are, and City Engineer Tom Day restated his observation of the condition of the arches.

DRB member Ron Bettin said that it looks pitiful, and that he would rather see it all torn out and rebuilt. He said he had a 180 degree reversal of his opinion at last month's meeting.

DRB member Dustin Proehl said that he didn't see holding the church to the fire because the arches are no longer histiorical.

DRB president Joe Molnar said he didn't want to see a hodgepodge 10, 20, 30 years down the road.

DRB member Terry Leonard said that when you will see yellow brick arches in front of a red brick building [the church's planned addition], you'll think "what idiot did that?"

DRB president Molnar said the house was a functionally obsolete buiding, and that you can't preserve averything. We can have a museum downtown with everything falling down.

DRB member Bart Henshaw said that the DRB likes collaboration, and just wish it would work!

There was no resolution of the issue in the meeting.