To move or not to move
OK, I'm going to probably be in considerable disagreement with several folks who I count as friends and colleagues, but ... I tend to side with Kappa Alpha on this.
And it's not because I'm against historic preservation. Nor is it because I think Confederate-themed fraternities are cool. It ain't because I don't think folks should work with their surrounding neighbors on particular projects. It's not of those things which folks will probably say.
Instead it's simply this - it was Kappa Alpha's property that they had legally and justly acquired, and it was their decision to make, and their decision alone. Yes, it would have been nice to preserve the houses and yes, it would have been nice to have reached a workable agreement with the Athens-Clarke County Heritage Foundation, but it didn't happen.
To be clear, Kappa Alpha was put in a difficult spot to begin with. Existing regulations for parking and for density necessitated the purchase of the additional property, and the property didn't come cheap. As the article notes, both parcels were assessed for only $190,000, but a local landlord sold them for $300,000. So, seeing how it was necessary for Kappa Alpha to buy the property and how they were charged more than $100,000 higher than the cost of the land, the fact they had even shown the patience to explore these alternative options is somewhat amazing to me.
However, this was ultimately their call, and if the maintaining the building would cost more than the income it could generate, it's a perfectly logical decision to make to demolish the buildings (particularly since they weren't to code). Even if the foundation had paid for the restoration of the buildings, the cost of upkeep would still have been too high.
And though I applaud the work done to move the buildings, I have to say that was a puzzling solution ... particularly since that makes little sense seeing how the buildings were historic in the context of the neighborhood. I don't understand how moving them to Winterville accomplishes anything outside of preserve the exisiting structures, but, again, I thought part of their importance was their relationship to the neighborhood.
I think Kelly Girtz did a ton of great work on this particular project, and that type of leadership and initiative is one of the primary reasons I am grateful that he is on the Athens-Clarke County Commission. He and I, as well as most folks who were upset with the demolition, agree on a good number of things, but, respectfully, we just don't see eye-to-eye on this.
And it's not because I'm against historic preservation. Nor is it because I think Confederate-themed fraternities are cool. It ain't because I don't think folks should work with their surrounding neighbors on particular projects. It's not of those things which folks will probably say.
Instead it's simply this - it was Kappa Alpha's property that they had legally and justly acquired, and it was their decision to make, and their decision alone. Yes, it would have been nice to preserve the houses and yes, it would have been nice to have reached a workable agreement with the Athens-Clarke County Heritage Foundation, but it didn't happen.
To be clear, Kappa Alpha was put in a difficult spot to begin with. Existing regulations for parking and for density necessitated the purchase of the additional property, and the property didn't come cheap. As the article notes, both parcels were assessed for only $190,000, but a local landlord sold them for $300,000. So, seeing how it was necessary for Kappa Alpha to buy the property and how they were charged more than $100,000 higher than the cost of the land, the fact they had even shown the patience to explore these alternative options is somewhat amazing to me.
However, this was ultimately their call, and if the maintaining the building would cost more than the income it could generate, it's a perfectly logical decision to make to demolish the buildings (particularly since they weren't to code). Even if the foundation had paid for the restoration of the buildings, the cost of upkeep would still have been too high.
And though I applaud the work done to move the buildings, I have to say that was a puzzling solution ... particularly since that makes little sense seeing how the buildings were historic in the context of the neighborhood. I don't understand how moving them to Winterville accomplishes anything outside of preserve the exisiting structures, but, again, I thought part of their importance was their relationship to the neighborhood.
I think Kelly Girtz did a ton of great work on this particular project, and that type of leadership and initiative is one of the primary reasons I am grateful that he is on the Athens-Clarke County Commission. He and I, as well as most folks who were upset with the demolition, agree on a good number of things, but, respectfully, we just don't see eye-to-eye on this.
posted by Jmac at 10:39 AM
9 Comments:
Weren't these things just crack houses anyway?
I mean, I think the folks at Heritage are starting to play a little fast-and-loose with this "historic" label.
But then, I thought the same thing when they tried to save the old school district central office complex.
Reggie
Had they waited and worked w/ the County all could have come out ahead --once the historic district is designated they are eligible for a bunch of tax breaks. The fact is that they (KAs) found doing this to be more expedient, and in the process Athens loses more of its historic houses. Yes, these may have been crack houses right now (I don't know), but as part of a historic district their owner too would have been eligible for tax breaks and they could have been cleaned up. Lots of places that are some finely preserved houses in Athens used to be dumps until someone with some vision came along! The frat house also had other land available to it to purchase that would just as easily served its purpose. The boat was being driven on thsi one by a housing corporation whose members are largely non-Athens folks and who don;t care one whit about our historic neighborhoods. It is a shame that the KA's didn't show more imagination. Moreover, given how they ruffled the feathers of folks over there when they moved, it was also incredibly stupid of them to go ahead from a PR point of view. This is exactly how NOT to win friends and influence people.
a. "historic" doesn't mean "perfect, picturesque, and old." So it doesn't matter if they were crack houses or not. If they had architectural integrity, were of a certain age, and were in reasonable condition then they were historic. "To code" is meaningless -- most of Athens isn't to code.
b. In the list of preservation solutions, moving is better than demolition. But not as good as keeping the houses in their historic context.
But, actually, that's not what this is about. This is a special case. I've said from the beginning that KA has the right to locate wherever they want and do whatever they want within the limits of our laws. And that's true here, too. But they didn't make the smartest choice for several reasons.
They're trying to demonstrate that despite a racist heritage and history of insensitive behavior toward the very people who live in the neighborhood surrounding their project that they're good citizens, and concerned with the neighborhood. The neighborhood is a) the neighbors and b) the ACHF/Athens Land Trust, who have been partnering with the neighborhood to get the 'hood properly designated and protected -- arguably if it were a more affluent area this would already have happened and KA wouldn't have been able to demolish the houses with so little oversight. But as it is they just demonstrated that their concern for the neighborhood is limited and motivated by self-interest.
Second, the letter is awfully diplomatic and cynical -- I especially like how they couched the demolition as meeting the neighborhood's concerns about too much parking, rather than acknowledging that they simply wanted to get rid of the houses, and the demolition comes with a consequence of reduced parking.
Anonymous II is correct -- this is simply more expedient. It's slightly more expensive to move or reuse these types of resources in the short term, and I'd be willing to bet that they never had any intention of doing anything differently.
So will there be a public outcry when Mike Adams destroys the current KA house? It's way more of an historic structure than the two houses that were recently demolished. I suspect there will be no such outcry. Let's all remember that if KA had their way, they would stay in the house on campus they have been in for 55 years and avoid moving into this neighborhood. The neighborhood that is 70% rental. It's sad when an organization's heritage is attacked to gain points in a zoning argument. I hear no talk about the Confederate museum or Egyptian temple built by a felon that are both .2 miles away.
If the public wants to save those houses, then they need to let mike adams know that. and now, while planning for those lots is underway, rather than when it's time to knock them down.
Nice red herring, though.
Now hold on a minute. Nicki, with all due respect, you're passing the buck here. That's a reasonable comparison to make and far from a red herring.
If the Heritage Foundation is in the business of preserving historical buildings in our community, why do the boundaries stop at the campus line? Why do some structures warrant preservation, but others do not? Why is it Michael Adams's problem and not the foundation's?
Surely you can't deny that those buildings our anonymous commenter referred to don't feature some elements worth preserving.
I guarantee you the current KA house has more history than the two houses demolished. It was at one time used for veteran housing. So I look forward to some heavy lobbying by the Heritage Foundation to keep the structures that have been around 50 plus years and a part of the campus atmosphere.
I would hope that the Heritage Foundation does also raise this issue. However, let's not forget that the present KA house is on state property, and so is not under the control/ influence of the HF in the way in which the houses just demolished would be had they not been demolished -- not eligible for tax breaks etc because the Univ doesn't pay property taxes. So, although I agree w/ the tenor of the comment, these are two quite different situations from a legal/ tax point of view.
Agreed anon 11:03
Although if the HF had voiced some concerns about the history of the KA housing being destroyed a couple of years ago, we may not be in the situation we're in right now...
Post a Comment
<< Home