Here we go yet again..... another historic kansas city (lower case on purpose) landmark is about to be destroyed. This is negligence by the owner and incompetence by the city... dangerous buildings in particular. I don't believe for a second that this structure is "dangerous"... why not use the $115,000 for demolition to secure it if it's that dangerous? The Cosby Hotel was built in 1881 and has managed to stand for 129 years.... yet, all of a sudden, it's a threat. Bull.In the case of an historic building a second opinion as to the need for demolition should be automatic and totally independent of the city agency that first determined the status.
How come we have structures all over Northeast that ARE actually falling down but there is no money to raze them.... I can show you three adjacent homes on Independence Avenue one of which has a roof that is falling off ... but we can sure find money to destroy our history.
I have seen zero change from the city council and the mayor's office in regards to preservation of historic properties. I also believe that Landmarks and other historic associations are falling down on the job since this is allowed over and over again.
From now on if my preferred candidate for office doesn't have a vocal and deep seated commitment to preservation I will either vote for their opponent or I'll skip voting altogether in that race.
Enough is enough.
Follow the money. At the end of the trail will be a vested interest.
ReplyDeleteIs that the building? What exactly is wrong with it, I wonder. It doesn't look like the pieces are falling off or anything...
ReplyDeleteI knew KC was not good with preservation when they took down the old Paseo High School--I thought that was a crime.
That's the building, from Google Maps, so the picture is about two years old.... I don't believe for a second that it's about to collapse....
ReplyDeleteStupid and senseless. You're right, there are other places that need it more. I hope they can save it.
ReplyDeleteThis is absolutely spot-on. Where do I sign up?
ReplyDeleteFor now I would email council members and the mayor's office.... even if you don't live here... we need a chorus of voices...
ReplyDeleteBut make sure you make your voice heard today... literally. Demolition starts today. They rushed this through hoping no one would notice.
ReplyDeleteThe owner wants to tear it down anyways. There's no way it will be staying up, city or otherwise. The star has the telling lack of quote where he doesn't lament the tear down and instead says he'll build something new.
ReplyDeleteANY building that is suddenly slapped with a "Dangerous Building" sticker - without a long, well documented series of code violations - simply isn't a dangerous building (unless a tree fell on it, or a fire weakened it, or an earthquake shook it). These buildings are an "inconveinence" to short-sighted developers.
ReplyDeleteBuilding owners can do what they want … which is why it's a good idea to have things registered Historic with capital H, so that the place belongs more wholly to "everyone," to the public interest.
ReplyDeleteYes, this fellow seems to have played the system and won … TIF for a while, lack of maintenance (you know, allowing the bricks on the front to be compromised, apparently to the point of *sudden and imminent danger*), and then paying $115,000 to the city to have the place razed instead of repaired. Wonder what grand great wonderful new building will go up … and how long _that_ one will be vacant …
SIGH!
my city is dumb.
There are way better buildings around from that genre. YOU did manage one shot of our best one, you called the NY Life Building. I knew it in the sixties as the Waddell & Reed Bldg. How's the old spaghetti factory bldg doing downtown, a few blocks over?
ReplyDeleteThe one being razed was a Lithograph company for years. You wanna see some great old buildings? Drive up to St Joseph! I think I sent some of your stuff to my dau in NY who does landmark restoration engineering. I laughed one day when she came to town and remarked how short KC bldgs are by comparison.
We dont' seem to have a strong interest in KC towards restoration of early KC buildings. Homes, yes, downtown, not so much. I hear money's pretty tight right now tho, even in the big apple. It would seem to me, this kind of downturn would be a time to just let them sit until times improve. Not just tear em down like they're setting the land underneath them on fire.
$115,000 would repair/replace quite a few bricks. What we need is reform that allows the Neighborhood Preservation Dept. to do what its title implies. Why can't demolition money be spent on repairing roofs, walls, etc., before it gets so bad that it must be demolished? I'm not sure what exactly is being preserved in most cases, because it's certainly not the buildings.
ReplyDeleteTemporary good news Anthony.... the city has put the "demo on hold pending further review." I think a lot more people than usual were ticked off about this.
ReplyDelete