Hartford — After hearing three hours of conflicting reports on whether the Reid & Hughes building is on the verge of collapse, the state Historic Preservation Council voted unanimously Wednesday to ask the state Attorney General's Office to seek an injunction to halt Norwich officials' planned demolition.

Preservation council members agreed with building preservation advocates from three different organizations that the city's lack of maintenance on the 19th century building amounted to “demolition by neglect.”

“Demolition by neglect is something I feel in my gut,” council member Maher said just prior to the vote.

“I am generally interested in the city's custodianship,” council member Katherine Kane said earlier during the hearing, “which is demolition by neglect, and I'm very sad about that.”

With the vote, all documents and exhibits presented to the preservation council will be forwarded to the state Attorney General's Office for review, architectural historian Todd Levine said after the meeting. Officials there will determine whether to take the matter to court to stop the city's planned demolition.

Norwich City Manager John Salomone said city leaders will discuss the issues with the Attorney General's Office and proceed from there.

“We'll cross that bridge when we come to it, if the attorney general wants to proceed with the injunction,” Salomone said after the meeting. “We'll discuss it with the Attorney General's Office.”

City Historian Dale Plummer, president of the Norwich Heritage Trust, the lead proponent of saving the Reid & Hughes, said if the city cooperated with prospective developers, the entire legal battle could be avoided.

“The ball is in the city's court,” Plummer said. “The city has to make a determination to save this building. All we need is the cooperation of Norwich. That's all we need.”

The City Council voted in October to bond up to $800,000 to demolish the building, rejecting a proposal by the Women's Institute for Housing and Economic Development to do an estimated $6 million renovation.

That plan included a request that the city pay an estimated $300,000 to stabilize the building to allow time to obtain financing for the plan to create 20 housing units and retail space. In November, however, New London developer Bill Morse offered to invest $200,000 of his own money into stabilization efforts. Morse told the preservation council he specializes in restoring historical buildings and has been following the saga of the Reid & Hughes for the past five years, always expecting a developer would come forward.

Representatives from Norwich Heritage Trust, the Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation and the Norwich Historical Society all urged the preservation council to stop the demolition process during the hearing. City leaders argued that the city has tried numerous times to secure a developer for the split-level, landlocked building at 199-201 Main St. since it took ownership in 1993, but numerous obstacles prevented those plans from coming to fruition.

Both sides presented testimony from structural engineers attempting to bolster their arguments. Jeremey Williamson, an engineer with CLA Engineers Inc. of Norwich, the firm that has been monitoring the structural condition of the Reid & Hughes for the past two decades, told the preservation council that "there is a strong likelihood of further collapse" this winter of the shorter, three-story portion of the building, and it could drag down a portion of the more sound four-story portion.

But Jim Grant, a structural engineer working for Women's Institute project architect William Crosskey of Crosskey Architects, said it took him only a one-hour tour through the building to determine it was in “sound condition.” He said it is in much better shape than some other buildings he has worked on.

“I can assure you this building is not going to collapse over this winter,” Grant told the council.

Crosskey said the plan would be to use Morse's private investment to apply for $100,000 through the city's $3.3 million downtown revitalization program, administered by the Norwich Community Development Corp., to reach the $300,000 needed to stabilize the building.

Crosskey said the work entailed in the stabilization — repairs to the collapsed portion of the roof and the upper walls — would become part of the permanent renovation, and not just a temporary fix that would be ripped out later.

City officials argued that even the stabilization would cost more than the estimated $300,000.

Wednesday's hearing started with Salomone giving a 20-minute review of the city's 23-year ownership of the building and the $190,000 the city has put into building maintenance over that time — a figure one council member called low.

Salomone and other city officials listed numerous obstacles to redevelopment, including the small building footprint, with no rear access beyond its walls, no parking and the new federal flood plain maps that would require the lower levels to be flood-proofed.

Plummer countered that the building's deteriorated condition was caused by the city's neglect, starting with its first winter of ownership, when city officials shut off power without draining water pipes, causing them to burst and flood the building. Years later, Plummer said, the city agreed to fix only the roof over the four-story portion, believing that to be the only historical structure and leading to steady deterioration of the lower-level roof.

Plummer presented photos of the historical Wauregan Hotel, which also was owned by the city and proposed for demolition before the preservation council's predecessor, the state Historic Preservation Commission, voted against the city's plan. Plummer said the city had equally neglected the Wauregan, calling it a pattern of “demolition by deliberate neglect.”

“If the city is willing to spend that much money to demolish the building, why not spend that money to work with a developer to restore the building?” Plummer asked. “It makes no sense, none whatsoever.”

c.bessette@theday.com