Devin, have you become a preservationist?
I have that book that Devin cited in his post. It's by local architectural historian George Ehrlich, who I believe is on the faculty at UMKC. If memory serves me correctly, he is a past member of the Kansas City Landmarks Commission, and a member of the Historic Kansas City Foundation.
In Erhlich's book, on page 92, he states "In both stages the (SW Bell) building was given Gothicized detailing, and stepback parapets of the 1929 addition were particularly impressive examples of bold relief ornament and how it functioned. The past tense has to be used in this case, because while the building still stands, its original facade does not. It was veneered and color added in 1974-76. The stucco of marble aggregate and the paint were at attempt by a new owner to modernize the exterior in conjunction with an interior renovation."
I seem to recall reading somewhere else that the original gothic exterior decorative elements were removed in the 70s renovation. If one studies the photo of the original building against the photo of the present building, one can see that those decorative elements were removed, and don't remain. It appears that there is no exterior facade left underneath from that era, and no outer shell to remove to reveal such.
That is a terrible shame, and I wish it wasn't so. It would be prohibitively expensive to replace those elements today, and one would have difficulty finding artisans who could. The only artisans that still practice that craft are mostly Europeans who work on gothic cathedrals there.
I'm sure that if local preservationists prepared a list of terrible architectural loses in KC history, losing the gothic facade of the SW Bell Building/Oak Tower would be among them.
Had that facade remained, the SW Bell Building would have been a valued architectural treasure--like the Power and Light Building, Municipal Auditorium, City Hall, and the Jackson County Courthouse.
Other than various churches around town, the SW Bell Building was the among few of the gothic-inspired buildings in the city, and it was the only truly gothic-styled skyscraper in Kansas City. It would have been KC's version of the Woolworth Building in New York; or as GuyinLenexa stated, the Chicago Tribune Building in Chicago. All the other aforementioned buildings are different styles of art-deco; whereas the SW Bell Building was of gothic design that preceded art deco.
While the Firestone and Kansas City Club buildings are gothic-inspired, they are more restrained versions of gothic design; whereas the SW Bell Building was pure gothic.
When one becomes of aware of losses like the facade of the SW Bell Building/Oak Tower, I think it's an opportunity to become more aware and active in preserving architecture. Now we see the value of how that building once appeared. With hindsight, we see the error of removing that facade to modernize. That building would be much more attractive now had that facade been retained, and it would have more aesthetic and intrinsic value than what is there now.
One thing I noticed in the American Institute of Architects Guide to Kansas City Architecture and Public Art is that the SW Bell/Oak Tower was not included as an architecturally significant building. It probably would have been included had that facade not been removed.
Preservation of old buildings doesn't necessarily mean that modifications and renovations cannot be done. The Oak Tower could have had the interior remodeled and the exterior left intact, and it wouldn't have significantly affected the owners ability to utilize the building and keep tenants.
One can preserve old buildings and find new uses for them without changing their appearance dramatically. That's why I'm fighting to save the Empire Theater and President Hotel. Saving those buildings and finding a profitable reuse is important, so that we don't bemoan there loss in the future--as we are now with the loss of the original facade of the SW Bell/Oak Tower building.
There is no fifth destination.
