The 100 block plan for State Street continues to be hotly debated by city committees as area developers hope for a decision to demolish numerous buildings.

The proposal, developed by the 100 Block Foundation, would make major changes to several buildings on State Street.

Citizens of varying perspectives came together Monday night at the city’s Landmarks Commission meeting to share their opinions on the aspect of the proposal that would demolish the historic Schubert and Fairchild, or Stark, buildings.

David Stark, grandson of the builder of the landmark Stark building, said that despite the family legacy, he and his father both support adopting the 100 Block Foundation’s proposal to demolish the building at 122-124 W. Mifflin St.

“What it comes down to for us and our family’s connection to it, ultimately we believe the Frautschis have stepped forward with their generous gift to the city,” Stark said.

The project, to be funded by the Frautschis, would redevelop an “ugly” block, Stark said. He said it supports a cohesive vision for the downtown area.

Stark said the buildings are clearly in disrepair and have not been used, and for his family to object to tearing the building down would be unfair.

“We want to keep our vision focused on present and future, not in the past,” Stark said.

Jason Tish, director of the Madison Trust for Historic Preservation, said both the Stark and Schubert buildings are both viable and contribute to the “unified sense” of State Street.

Tish said the neighborhood at Fairchild Street and Mifflin Street is eligible to be a historic district.

“These buildings contribute to our idea of our city’s landscape and our city’s history,” Tish said.

Gary Peterson, a city planning consultant for more than 40 years, said it would not be a lasting loss to tear down the two buildings, as they both are experiencing blight, or damage to many aspects of their infrastructure.

Peterson said making the necessary renovations to these buildings would be extremely expensive, particularly to replace the foundations.

“[The Stark building] may be historic, but it’s falling apart,” Peterson said.

Several downtown residents said they disagreed with the proposal and emphasized the buildings’ role in the city’s history.

George Austin, director of the proposal, said the project seeks to create a sense of place and expression for the Fairchild-Mifflin corner.

He said the properties have not been maintained, and that the commission should think of the project as a whole in order to see the benefits that would come from it.

“It isn’t because of lack of respect for the landmark, but rather the vision for the future,” Austin said.

Ultimately, the commission voted to advise the Plan Commission of the Fairchild building’s historic value.

Additionally, the Landmarks Commission voted to refer the decision to allow a certificate of appropriateness for demolition of the Schubert building to the Urban Design and Plan Commissions for further feedback before a final decision is reached.