As any good chemist, metallurgist or reader of the Bible knows, "Gold is tested in fire." The heat of the fire purifies the gold, removing those minerals and deposits that are not of the essence of the precious metal.
| |  |
| | | John Flaherty is director of the Office for Research and Planning of the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh. | |
| | |
In the forge of our common life as a civic community, debate is often the fire that purifies our thoughts and opinions, separating flawed thinking and erroneous opinions from the precious metal of what we need to create vibrant communities.
That is why the debate concerning the historic designation of Mellon Arena is more than just a fanciful discussion between the merits of preserving a distinctive building and where the Penguins might -- or might not -- play in the future.
The debate raises serious questions about a variety of issues. How do we, as a society, balance private interests with public needs? How do we affirm the cultural values of the architectural and historic significance of structures while realistically evaluating the business usefulness and economic feasibility of a facility?
What is the role of elected government bodies such as City Council vs. that of appointed bodies such as the Historic Review Commission? I am keenly and particularly interested in the debate about the role of City Council in making decisions about matters such as whether the Mellon Arena should be designated a historic structure
Quite frankly, I am sorry that some of the refining of that role in the current discussion concerning Mellon Arena did not occur earlier.
When City Council was reviewing the forced historic designation -- a historic designation against the will of the owners -- of St. Nicholas church on the North Side, some City Council members stated that they did not have any discretion in the matter.
If a property met any of the broadly defined criteria contained in the city's ordinance and if the Historic Review Commission recommended forced designation, City Council, its members seemed to think, had no choice but to rubber stamp that decision.
As the debate regarding Mellon Arena takes place, many are pointing -- and rightly so -- to the distinctive role of City Council in comparison to the Historic Review Commission.
No matter which side one takes in the debate over the future of Mellon Arena, it is clear that City Council will have a fundamental and active role in that decision. Decisions concerning historic designation involve a far wider issue than merely requiring the owner of a building to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness from a non-elected body prior to making any exterior changes to the structure.
Decisions regarding historic designation of a property have as much to do with Pittsburgh's future as its past. A yes or no vote on the historic designation of Mellon Arena will have much to say about the future of the Lower Hill District. As Councilman Sala Udin pointed out in the Post-Gazette June 2, the Lower Hill District was dramatically changed by the initial decision to create the arena.
It will be similarly affected for decades by decisions made now whether to preserve the arena or knock it down. The Historic Review Commission has an intentionally narrow role in city life. It reviews and recommends what it sees as important architectural and historic buildings and makes a case for their historic designation. While it is certainly concerned with the wider good of the community as it sees it, the commission defines that good through its own focus of preserving old buildings.
City Council must take a wider approach. It must be actively involved in decisions concerning historic preservation because such designations will have dramatic impact on the community, for good or bad. For example, there is another building in the city that some preservationists might want to have maintained as is -- Children's Hospital in Oakland. The owners want a new facility to better serve the community. Does the final call on this debate belong to the Historic Review Commission?
Much as in the case of Mellon Arena, in the end it should be up to City Council to balance the pros and cons in order to make the right decision for the community as a whole. The responsibility of City Council is to determine what is in the best interest of the city.
Council has to balance the issues of preservation with the vibrancy of a neighborhood and its future. It can't simply have its collective hands tied by the wishes of a non-elected commission, no matter how well intentioned.
The issue is a simple one. Is City Council involved in decisions of forced designation or is it a rubber stamp of the Historic Review Commission, as the Diocese of Pittsburgh was told concerning St. Nicholas church on East Ohio Street? It seems clear in the case of Mellon Arena that the final say must be the responsibility of City Council. And if that applies to the historic designation of Mellon Arena, it applies as well to other structures in the city, including old churches.
E-mail this story 
