Abstract
Jim Neville has lived in Shaker Heights since 1970 and works for an architectural firm in the city. He talks about the Shaker Heights board of Architectural Review. He, as of 2012, was still serving on the board. He discusses how the board works, the standards they aim to keep in Shaker, and the value of the architecture. He also talks about the challenges of building sympathetic additions, even to his own historic home.
Loading...
Interviewee
Neville, Jim (interviewee)
Interviewer
Smith, Kelsey (interviewer)
Project
Shaker Heights Centennial
Date
7-6-2012
Document Type
Oral History
Duration
29 minutes
Recommended Citation
"Jim Neville Interview, 06 July 2012" (2012). Cleveland Regional Oral History Collection. Interview 915020.
https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/crohc000/492
Transcript
Kelsey Smith [00:00:00] So I’m just gonna have you say your name first so I can test the sound.
Jim Neville [00:00:03] Jim Neville.
Kelsey Smith [00:00:05] Okay. And today is July 6, 2012.
Jim Neville [00:00:10] Right.
Kelsey Smith [00:00:12] Alright. So where were you born?
Jim Neville [00:00:15] I was born in Cleveland, actually.
Kelsey Smith [00:00:18] Where in Cleveland?
Jim Neville [00:00:20] Where in Cleveland? I don’t remember the hospital. But anyway, I was raised in, raised in Euclid and went to college here in Cleveland. Western Reserve University, not Case Western Reserve University, with a graduate degree in architecture, a Bachelor of Architecture degree, after I graduated in 1969, had friends that had an apartment at Shaker Square, which I really liked a lot, and moved to an apartment there in 1970, and have lived in the school district and in Shaker Heights since that time.
Kelsey Smith [00:01:05] And what did you do? Did you work for an architectural firm or-
Jim Neville [00:01:09] When I graduated from college, I worked for a structural engineer for a while and then I went to work for the city of Cleveland when Carl Stokes was mayor. I worked in the properties department. We designed playgrounds, play fields, things like that. We oversaw- There was a street festival, one of the first street festivals in downtown where all of Euclid Avenue- We closed off Euclid Avenue from East 18th up to Public Square and had a three-day festival, which we worked on, that was kind of fun. And then started working at Shaker Square for a while with a firm at Shaker Square, then went back downtown, worked for a firm in the Arcade, which is now the Hyatt Hotel. I worked there for about four years and then in 1978, came back to the firm I’m with right now. And we used to have offices at 12000 Shaker before moving to 3570 Warrensville center in 1987. So I’ve been there since then.
Kelsey Smith [00:02:18] And when did you get involved with the Architectural Board of Review in Shaker?
Jim Neville [00:02:23] I got involved early, maybe 1993, 1995. I had done. I had a swimming partner, a woman that I swam with, and she wanted to do something on her house, and I did drawings for her. She presented. She was eight months pregnant at the time that she went to make this presentation to the architectural board. And I expected her to come back and say, oh, they love the design, it was fine. She came back practically in tears because they had told her she couldn’t do anything that she thought she was going to be able to do. And I didn’t like that. So I met with a member of the board, bid him for coffee, and we talked and I made some adjustments. Adjustments. He made some concessions and we got it done. But after that I called Pat Mearns, who was the mayor, and told her, for many residents of our community, garbage collection and the Architectural Review Board are two of the things they may actually encounter and have to use or take advantage of in their time as residents of our community. And that I felt that you can tell people something, you can give people bad news or tell them what they don’t want to hear, as long as you can articulate why you’re doing it. And I fundamentally complained bitterly about the way my friend was treated and the manner in which she was treated, really. So four months later, the mayor said, okay, smart guy, I’m going to put you on the board as an alternate. So I started as an alternate. I don’t remember when it was ’94, ’93, ’95, somewhere right in there. And I’ve gone - we have term limits now - and I’ve been privileged to have gone through my first series of- I think there’s a six-year, two three-year terms. And then I was off for a while and then renominated and then off for a while and renominated again. So I’ve been doing it for a long time.
Kelsey Smith [00:04:43] So where does the Board of Architectural Review fit into, city, into the city government?
Jim Neville [00:04:50] The Architectural Board of Review is part of the, is under the overall authority of the Director of Planning, Joyce Braverman. We have staff support that also handles the Board of Zoning Appeals and the Planning Commission. So those three bodies are all under the Planning Department.
Kelsey Smith [00:05:15] And how far does the board’s power reach? I mean, as far as how much can they tell you to do and not to do? Is it limited to exterior or, I mean, things like that?
Jim Neville [00:05:29] The board’s power is actually defined. It’s codified in the ordinances for the city. There have been some restrictions put on the board by changes in the Ohio building code. We generally comment only on the exterior of the building, though most times we need to learn about what’s going on on the inside to have a better appreciation of things, how that interior planning manifests itself in the exterior appearance of the building. So we will review floor plans to have a better context for making our judgment on something that is very subjective, obviously.
Kelsey Smith [00:06:18] And how does- What kind of complaints do you usually get? Common problems? I mean, what- I don’t know. Do people come to you and complain about other people or-
Jim Neville [00:06:32] There are. No one comes to us to complain about other people, though. Many of the cases that we review are driven by complaints from neighbors who observe something happening on a house that looks, or on any kind of a building that looks fairly bizarre. And they initiate a call then to the planning department or they’re directed to the planning department. The planning department will send out a staff person, sometimes an intern, whoever, take a look at it, maybe take some photographs and check with the building department to see if a permit has been taken. And if it hasn’t, then they’ll notify the homeowner that an appearance before the board is required. As far as. Actually, we get a fair number of cases where people express ignorance of the process and unfortunately, what we tell them. Well, there are two things. First is we have to make a judgment based on what we would have said had you presented it to us. And that isn’t what people want to hear. A lot of people think that the forgiveness is going to be easier than getting permission. And that doesn’t always happen. Unfortunately, in all these cases, there are examples of homeowners who are trying to, in most cases, trying to improve their residences. So we take that into. We try to take that into account, but we also try to help them understand that by taking whatever action we take, we are setting precedents. And that makes it very difficult over the long term. I actually had a professor of architecture when I was in school who talked about. We talked about architectural boards and what the context of that really is. And the responsibility that we have is to not look at what is being done and its impact over the next two years or three years. Our perspective is a generational perspective. We are trying to preserve the architectural heritage of our community, viewing each homeowner as the current steward of their home. It is their home, but they are the stewards of that home in the context of the broad community. And it’s our responsibility to maintain the architectural integrity to the maximum extent that we can.
Kelsey Smith [00:09:19] So do you have specific standards that you hold to as far as when you’re reviewing people’s additions or changes that they make?
Jim Neville [00:09:30] There are some specific standards for siding, for roofing, various common systems, but in most cases, every case is looked at on its own merit. There are things that we generally don’t approve, like glass block. Glass block is generally not approved in above-grade conditions, sometimes in basements. There are some examples in our community where glass block has been installed, but they are very infrequent. And if they have been approved recently under very, very narrow range of very specific conditions. That’s one example.
Kelsey Smith [00:10:26] And I guess how do you enforce all of this? Is it, I guess because you’re under the city, how does that work?
Jim Neville [00:10:35] If push came to shove and it goes to, I think it goes to the common police court. I don’t Think it goes to housing court. It can do that. We’ve never had. Knock on wood. Whoops, knock on wood. But we’ve never had a case. I’ve never had a case that went. That went to court. Yes. Thank you. Generally, when I mentioned earlier my discussions with Mayor Mearns about treating people as you would like to be treated, in every case that we’ve had, situations where strong feelings are present, we’ve been able to sort through it. And I’ve never had a case that went that far. And most people are very understanding. I actually had one case when I was an alternate, and it happened to be a lawyer and a person that I happened to be on another board with. And he did not like what happened. And he took out his business cards and he just threw them across the table at everybody and said, gentlemen, I am a litigator. You will hear from me. And I called him up afterwards and I said, gee, I had to take that card out of my sternum. I almost needed surgery because of the way it hit me. He started to laugh, but he was very angry. But he didn’t understand the process. He didn’t understand what we were trying to do, really. He had no context for what we were trying to do. He just came in thinking he was going to be approved because that’s what he wanted to do, and he owned his house, and that was it. We sat down, we talked about it for about an hour, and he acknowledged the point of view and it worked out. But if you. It’s been our experience, if you sit down and talk with people and make an effort to communicate and try to find some common ground, it works out.
Kelsey Smith [00:12:42] So when you buy a house in Shaker, do you know about the Architectural Board of Review, or is it something that you may not necessarily know when you go to buy a house?
Jim Neville [00:12:54] I’m not sure about that process, but we encourage- All the real estate agents that sell property in Shaker Heights are very much aware of the standards of the Architectural Board’s existence and the requirements to go before the board for various things. Those regulations are also published in Shaker Magazine on a regular basis. The city makes a significant effort to help homeowners understand what they need to do for various improvements, where things get more difficult to appreciate sometimes for homeowners. We require permits for putting up vinyl siding, for instance. We require permits for replacing windows. A lot of those ordinances or requirements are the results of contractors and homeowners who have taken advantage of the fact that permits hadn’t been required previously. And we had some really, really awful situations develop where people just were totally disrespectful of their homes. Took down all the moldings around the windows, all the moldings around the roof, and just run vinyl siding right up to the windows because that’s cheaper. While you see two or three or four or five of those go up in the city. And that’s what you end up having to create a law that says you can’t do that and nobody. Well, the law says you have to go to the architectural board. So that’s what expands our responsibilities. In many cases, there are situations where people have taken advantage of the situation and not done well by their homes.
Kelsey Smith [00:14:52] Are there any, like, problematic areas? Is one. Do all areas suffer the same kind of, you know, people? I guess because I’ve noticed in interviewing people, Shaker tends to be kind of subdivided by neighborhood. Are there any neighborhoods which experience more problems than others? As far as people disrespecting the architectural integrity.
Jim Neville [00:15:24] I haven’t found that to be true. I think that there are different- There are different architectural heritages in different parts of our community. But whether the house is in Fernway or whether it’s in Mercer or whether it’s in Moreland, we encounter many of the same, many of the same, we call them issues, occasionally. And you’ll get a particularly vocal verbal homeowner who feels very passionate about whatever it is they’re trying to do. And they’re perfectly comfortable about coming forward and expressing that passion. But no, I mean, there are certainly the current real estate conditions create situations where people are getting into houses and stripping out the copper and doing things that are quite bizarre, or the individuals who are buying homes and flipping them who really aren’t. It’s not so bad now as it was two years ago. Many of the folks that are buying these older houses, particularly out of foreclosure, are putting a lot of money into them and really making them once again, viable real estate opportunities for purchasers. Not everyone that’s involved with that does the same quality work. And that’s what we try to try to keep track of, too.
Kelsey Smith [00:17:04] Now, you said there’s different architectural heritages in different neighborhoods. Could you describe those a little bit?
Jim Neville [00:17:12] Well, we have Moreland, which is a lot of two story, I’m sorry, two-family homes with porches. Very nice porches. A lot of very nice lead window detailing. Not common in all of Cleveland. Cleveland is adjacent on that side of town, but the houses are, again, mostly frame houses and very similar in architectural character. You get over into the Onaway area, Fernway area, where the houses are, have a little more detail, a lot of brick, some wood frame also, but more. You see Georgian styles, you’ll see Tudor styles. And then as you move into Mercer, where the styles are more from the ’50s, so there’s a variety. And then certainly the very large 2 acre, 3 acre residences, which are extraordinary and very unique to our community. So a broad variety of housing opportunities, which is the way the Van Sweringens laid it out to provide individuals with ownership possibilities for smaller starter homes. And then moving from one neighborhood to a neighborhood with larger residences. And finally, if. If everything worked out great, you could buy the three acre or four acre. Well, not four acre, but the larger residences as well.
Kelsey Smith [00:18:41] Do you live in an older house?
Jim Neville [00:18:44] I do, I do. I live in the Onaway neighborhood on Chadbourne behind City Hall. And I love our house. I mean, you- It is a brick. It is a brick, I’ll say Tudor in styling, with a steeper roof. We have some stucco on the house. But we also had a house on Ludlow at Shaker Square, which was a Tudor with leaded-glass windows and a slate roof. And so I was used to the maintenance, the unique maintenance associated with those kinds of residences. But it’s just a great house with the wood detailing, the plaster detailing, round top doors, windows inside the house, all the moldings that have been round and curved. We put an addition on actually in 1995 for our daughter, who has since passed away, but putting an elevator in our house. We had looked around at remodeling, buy a new house or buy a different house, remodel, and concluded that we would stay right where we were. But it was very challenging to put my money where my mouth was, literally in terms of the architectural board and improvements, but matching all of the moldings, having custom moldings fabricated so it matched everything that was there, matching the architectural style of all the windows, slate roof on the addition. So that it was. Again, we’re the stewards of this residence for the time that we own it, but there will be others who are going to own it after we leave. So.
Kelsey Smith [00:20:21] Yeah, I live with my parents in an old house in Chesterland. So 1838.
Jim Neville [00:20:27] 1838. Oh, wow.
Kelsey Smith [00:20:32] Yeah. Restoration.
Jim Neville [00:20:33] And that is. I do a lot of work out at Western Reserve Academy in Hudson, and I do work out there on houses 1835, 1841. And it’s extraordinary when you take them apart to remodel them and just all the wood pegs and bracings and things that you see that are been Covered up and just like you want to leave it exposed because it’s really very, very handsome. It’s neat.
Kelsey Smith [00:21:00] Yes. So I know all about matching and things like that. I love old houses.
Jim Neville [00:21:08] They do take some patience.
Kelsey Smith [00:21:10] We’ve been working on ours for nine years, so still not even close.
Jim Neville [00:21:15] I understand that.
Kelsey Smith [00:21:20] Do you know when. When the Architectural Board of Review came into being? I don’t know if you’ll know the answer to that.
Jim Neville [00:21:26] I don’t know the answer to that. We lived at Shaker Square until ’87. It was here. I believe it was here when we moved to Shaker in ’87, though I had no reason to be in contact with them at that time. I don’t know.
Kelsey Smith [00:21:51] Yeah. And what about commercial buildings? I don’t know. How does the board work with them? Is that more difficult or- I mean, some of the buildings are.
Jim Neville [00:22:06] New, actually, as I was driving up Chagrin Boulevard to come to this interview, drove past the new CVS building that’s going up and drove past the firehouse that was constructed probably 10 years ago now. And just recalling the presentations of those projects to our board and the dialogue that we had, particularly on the CVS building, the dialogue that we had with the designers, impressing on them that the design that was particularly for that building, the design which had been proposed initially, did not have a prayer of being approved and that we needed to sit down with some serious design people and discuss this further. Or the bank actually were right across the street from cvs. Also, the advantage of the commercial projects, at least, is that there is generally an architect, there is always an architect involved who can appreciate the process, who is familiar with the process, who may still be passionate in representing something that he has described to his client, but still has a better understanding of the design process. Sometimes it takes a little longer for people to understand that we’re going to stick to our guns on some things, and some things are very, very important. But we also try to make that very clear to people and not waste people’s time. But we do provide the same as a homeowner, provide them with an opportunity to present their case. But it has been. That has been very rewarding to see the, I think, the favorable impact on the board’s activities on some of these projects, particularly if you look at some of the CVS structures that had been built in other communities where. And actually there’s one out on Chagrin Boulevard in. I don’t know if it’s Woodmere yet or not, but it’s like, wow, we really do have positive impact on the architecture of our community.
Kelsey Smith [00:24:26] Well, it’s nice that you build- You ensure that even new building is something with integrity. I like that. So what, I guess, what do you see in the future of the board? Are there any large projects in the future right now or in the making right now that the board is going to have to deal with or anything?
Jim Neville [00:24:56] I’m not aware of any large projects. Certainly there are a lot of initiatives that the city is undertaking to provide opportunities for new businesses, encouraging businesses to move to Shaker Heights. The amount of land available for new commercial buildings is relatively limited, just based on zoning and the way that the city has developed over the period, over the last hundred years. There are what the impact may be of the rework of my offices on Warrensville Center, just south of Chagrin Boulevard. The impact of the rework of that whole intersection. I mean, it’s being totally reconfigured. The impact on the evolution of new commercial properties as the result of that rework is actually potential is very exciting. How it manifests itself, we’ll have to wait and see. But there’s a lot of potential for. For development of property in that area.
Kelsey Smith [00:26:13] And I guess another thing is, like, how would you describe the importance of having architecture with integrity in the community? How has that helped Shaker or hindered. What kind of impact does that have, even economically or socially or whatever?
Jim Neville [00:26:36] The homes in Shaker Heights that were developed by the Van Sweringens and then continued that tradition with other builders, designers, architects, are all based on quality construction with fine detailing. And that is part of our heritage. That is part of the heritage of the city of Shaker Heights. There are very few communities in the country that can speak to having that kind of heritage. And as I said earlier, the mandate that our board has to preserve exactly that for future generations of homeowners in our community, I think is fundamental to who we are and would hope that as time goes on that we never lose sight of that, because it’s very, very important. And there’s a lot of examples of communities that haven’t recognized the value of those architectural qualities and say, sure, put up treated wood around the windows and take away all the moldings, and what are you left with? I mean, it provides a richness in our lives that I think in its absence would be tragic and feel very passionate about assuring that we are all stewards. And I actually, it frustrates me at times because individuals, homeowners, make a decision to move to Shaker Heights because of the beautiful homes and the great schools. Actually, it’s primarily the great schools and the beautiful homes happen to go with it. But then resist wanting to put money back into their homes to maintain the integrity of that, of that detailing of those architectural qualities. Though I think at the end of the day, when they look and see what they’ve been at times required to do, I think they’re proud of being able to be part of maintaining their heritage. At the end of the day, I hope they are.
Kelsey Smith [00:28:48] That’s all the questions I have. If there’s anything you want to add, feel free.
Jim Neville [00:28:57] No, actually, those are very good questions. I compliment you on the way that you structured them, put them together, and they were very good.
Kelsey Smith [00:29:05] Thank you.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License.
