The Spring Street house was designed by Cincinnati architect Carl Strauss and built in the mid 1950s.

Although the house was not listed as a contributing structure in the Glimmerglass Historic District nomination form because of its age, Kathleen LaFrank, of the New York State Historic Preservation Field Services Bureau, wrote in a letter to the board that it is an excellent example of a period and style not generally represented in the village and is the work of a noted modern architect.

``The residence is a significant addition to Cooperstown’s fine catalogue of historic architecture, and I hope that a way can be found to preserve it,’’ her letter stated.

The planning board, however, was faced with a problem when it came to determining if the house was of historic or architectural significance because the zoning law does not include a set of standards for making that the determination.

Previously, the board had been using the Glimmerglass Historic District property list which inventories structures in the village and lists them as contributing or non-contributing. It also considers all buildings constructed after 1949 to be non-contributing.

It is the same list used by the board in its decision to allow the demolition of a barn on Spring Street owned by Clark. The barn had been mistakenly omitted from the list because it did not have a 911 address.

Village attorney John Lambert told board members he was concerned about what criteria would be used to determine if the property was of historic significance and cautioned against using criteria different from what had been used in the past.

It was clear in last week’s meeting that not all board members were happy with the decision and would have liked to see the house saved. We can understand that, but the right decision was made. Every applicant before the board must be treated equally. In the case of a demolition permit, the same yardstick must be used to determine if a structure is of such architectural or historic significance to the community that it warrants being saved.

The demolition of the house points to the fact there are no set standards or tests in the law which can be used to determine if a structure should be saved.

Planning board chairwoman Teresa Drerup said following last week’s meeting that there has been inconsistency in the past in how a structure’s significance has been determined and a standard needs to be set.

``Lambert told us we can’t start writing the rules as we go,’’ she said.

Drerup said she and board members plan on developing criteria to use in the future so they have set procedures and everybody is treated the same.

The demolition of the Spring Street house is a loss, but it is not a severe blow to the village and the historic district. It is more palatable to lose this house, which many people are not even aware of, than one which contributed significantly to the village’s architectural heritage.

The planning board is on the right track. Standards need to be established so the next time a demolition permit application is filed, the board will be on firm footing.