The historic Firestone Plant 1 building in Firestone Park still stands as a defining landmark of Akron’s cultural, architectural, and industrial heritage. Built in 1910, it is one of the few remaining large-scale industrial structures that directly shaped the identity of both Firestone Park and the city as a whole. Its preservation is not simply about honoring the past, but it is also about how Akron chooses to steward its public assets into the future.

Recent developments in the continued push for demolition raise serious concerns about the City’s approach to this site.

The City established a 60-day window to identify a developer capable of preserving the front building and clock tower. That window has now closed, and the City has denied the proposal that was submitted. As many preservation, development, and planning professionals have noted, this timeline was unrealistic from the outset. Projects of this scale requires a more expanded feasibility analysis, financing exploration, environmental review to reclassify deed restrictions, and creative design work. Compounding this concern is the City’s handling of preservation commitments. The demolition pause was triggered only after an agreement dispute with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) came to light.

At the heart of this debate is not feasibility, but also policy. The City’s approach reflects how shared civic resources held in trust for the public, are need more evaluation and a slower approach to redevelopment. To be honest, it is a hard property to redevelop, but when historic public properties are framed primarily as “nuisances”  or balance-sheet burdens, the range of viable solutions narrows dramatically. This lens automatically favors liquidation and demolition. 

Firestone Plant 1 is not a “nuisance” property to be liquidated; it is a public asset that should be evaluated and invested in as such. Decisions about its future should weigh cultural legacy, neighborhood stability, environmental repair, and intergenerational value alongside financial considerations. Its threatened demolition echoes the demolition-first mindset of the Urban Renewal era, when highways and speculative development carved through Akron neighborhoods, severing communities and erasing civic landscapes. The scars of the Innerbelt project of the 1970s remain visible just north of the site. Razing Firestone would add another vacant parcel to that legacy, rather than correcting it.

To date, the City has not commissioned an independent, in-depth feasibility study based on complete and accurate information. The cost estimates frequently cited rely on incomplete assumptions and have not seriously evaluated phased reuse, hybrid preservation strategies or a full reevaluation of altering the properties deed restrictions. Adaptive reuse carries challenges, but it also carries long-term economic, cultural, and environmental benefits that demolition cannot deliver.

Across the country, cities including Cleveland, Detroit, and New York have demonstrated that historic preservation and economic vitality are not opposing forces. Reusing historic buildings supports local economies, attracts investment, and anchors neighborhoods in ways that vacant land or a cheap new build cannot. Akron deserves the same level of due diligence.

We urge Akron City Council and City leadership to pause demolition and take the following actions:

 • Reopen and extend the redevelopment process with a timeline of at least one year to allow serious proposals, financing exploration, and due diligence.

 • Commission an independent feasibility study that fully evaluates adaptive reuse, phased redevelopment, environmental remediation, and funding strategies.

 • Convene a public working group that includes neighborhood representatives, preservation experts, planners, and City officials to collaboratively evaluate options.

 • Establish a transparent public engagement policy for major demolition and redevelopment decisions in the future, ensuring community input shapes outcomes before decisions are finalized. 

 • Pursue layered funding sources that support adaptive reuse.

 • Conduct a transparent legal review of the site’s deed restrictions and explore mechanisms to modify or restructure them in ways that enable preservation-based redevelopment. 

Please sign this petition to support a more rigorous, transparent, and community-centered approach to the redevelopment of Firestone Plant 1. Akron’s public assets should be treated as shared civic resources. We urge the City of Akron to adopt a more collaborative and iterative framework that reflects the complexity and long-term stewardship required for projects of this scale.