Arkansas City will not be the focus now, but we can still talk about the town. For now the blog is a blog in search of an identity. Considering what the new niche will be.
What's the story on the building that got demolished on East Madison? I don't take the Traveler and the intro to Foss's article made it sound as if MCDonald and Warren were upset because they weren't informed of the owners plans in advance! I'm not sure they should have been - it's not their property!
Im not sure if you have to have a demolition permit or not, like you have to have a building permit. It was also not a historically significant building. But, if it were in the historic district, then thats another matter.
Do we want to have the debate on how far the right of property ownership goes? Should you be "allowed" to tear down a 200 year old building on your property when it has historic value in the community? This one didn't.
But what if Cowley College decided to tear down the old high school building that is the oldest standing building in town? THey own it, but do they also owe the community something? Is there responsibility with ownership?
I have relatives in Independence Missouri. They were tearing down some of the old houses to make parking lots (one example I know of was a new church). Those type houses would never be rebuilt! (We have actually condemned many of the old structures due to ADA!)
The community banded together to help preserve some of the old structures! (That,s in Truman territory and there is some historic value).
On the other hand some of the old structures and houses are simply outdated! They are too expensive to maintain and utilities are out of sight! The land they sit on has value! It is valuable because of the infrastructure - roads, water/electricity, sewer, etc.
Somewhere, history has to give way to progress and not get forgotten/lost in the process!
It has to be on a case by case basis. Any rule one way or the other wouldnt fit every case. I dont see anything wrong with having to get a permit to demolish a building. That way at least the public would have some warning and could give input.. I dont think anyone would have objected in the most recent case . but there are buildings where there would be objections.
In your example, I say if Cowley owned the building, and it was costing too much to keep up with it, they should be able to tear it down or sell it if they choose. They paid for it. If the city wanted to own it, they could have bought it. "Historic" is just another word for "old". And usually "money pit".
My Opinion: The story is just the Traveler trying to make news where there is none. Trying to inflame townspeople. Desperately trying to fill up space in their rag called a newspaper. Sheesh! Somebody tore down a building. The world's coming to an end. After all...they just ran a piece on it a day or two before. Mr. Archer is gone. Give it a rest.
JJ,
ReplyDeleteWhat's the story on the building that got demolished on East Madison?
I don't take the Traveler and the intro to Foss's article made it sound as if MCDonald and Warren were upset because they weren't informed of the owners plans in advance!
I'm not sure they should have been - it's not their property!
Im not sure if you have to have a demolition permit or not, like you have to have a building permit.
ReplyDeleteIt was also not a historically significant building.
But, if it were in the historic district, then thats another matter.
Do we want to have the debate on how far the right of property ownership goes?
Should you be "allowed" to tear down a 200 year old building on your property when it has historic value in the community?
This one didn't.
But what if Cowley College decided to tear down the old high school building that is the oldest standing building in town?
THey own it, but do they also owe the community something?
Is there responsibility with ownership?
I have relatives in Independence Missouri. They were tearing down some of the old houses to make parking lots (one example I know of was a new church). Those type houses would never be rebuilt! (We have actually condemned many of the old structures due to ADA!)
ReplyDeleteThe community banded together to help preserve some of the old structures! (That,s in Truman territory and there is some historic value).
On the other hand some of the old structures and houses are simply outdated! They are too expensive to maintain and utilities are out of sight! The land they sit on has value! It is valuable because of the infrastructure - roads, water/electricity, sewer, etc.
Somewhere, history has to give way to progress and not get forgotten/lost in the process!
It has to be on a case by case basis.
ReplyDeleteAny rule one way or the other wouldnt fit every case.
I dont see anything wrong with having to get a permit to demolish a building. That way at least the public would have some warning and could give input..
I dont think anyone would have objected in the most recent case . but there are buildings where there would be objections.
In your example, I say if Cowley owned the building, and it was costing too much to keep up with it, they should be able to tear it down or sell it if they choose. They paid for it. If the city wanted to own it, they could have bought it. "Historic" is just another word for "old". And usually "money pit".
ReplyDeleteMy Opinion: The story is just the Traveler trying to make news where there is none. Trying to inflame townspeople. Desperately trying to fill up space in their rag called a newspaper. Sheesh! Somebody tore down a building. The world's coming to an end. After all...they just ran a piece on it a day or two before. Mr. Archer is gone. Give it a rest.
ReplyDeleteI could just read the intros to both articles.
ReplyDeleteWarren distressed by the demolition of a 70 year old building?
I drove by the site and it really wasn't much of a building!
So, why get distressed over progress?
Someone wanting to do something that makes that property useful? Even if it should turn out to be a parking lot!
JJ, They should encourage investment in the community. They don't have to or shouldn't try to control everything!
Btw: This area already has enough monuments to the PAST!
ReplyDeleteYou can't make history living in the Past!