OFFICIAL: Law Building

Tosspot · Post by **Tosspot** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 2:54 pm

Posted on Tue, Jan. 11, 2005

KC's Law Building to be demolished

Razing is condition of its sale

By KEVIN COLLISON

The Kansas City Star

A demolition permit has been issued for the historic Law Building at 12th Street and Grand Boulevard, a long-vacant structure just outside the South Loop redevelopment area.

Owner Matt Abbott said Monday that the demolition was required as a condition to the pending sale of the building to a New York buyer, whom he declined to identify. Abbott said some interior demolition began over the weekend.

â€œThe new owner said before they would buy it, they wanted it demolished,â€

ComandanteCero · Post by **ComandanteCero** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 3:22 pm

you know, when all the local historic preservationist can say is "â€œIt would be an unfortunate occurrence,â€

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 3:27 pm

Actually Flynn is usually pretty outspoken if it's actually something worth saving. Her lack of comment tells me a lot.

ComandanteCero · Post by **ComandanteCero** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:19 pm

yeah, i agree that was my second reaction too, it seems if she didn't seem too upset it meant it might not be worth saving at all...... (worth saving in terms of historical value). However even if there isn't a historical argument, i still think that in terms of urbanity, character and density and bringing people and businesses instead of parking this is a valuable part of the streetscape of downtown. It's kind of like all the buildings that were/are being knocked down for the P+L district and the Arena, sure none of them are historically or architecturally significant. But they were invaluable in terms of character and urban variety, and creating that finer grained urban landscape that encourages a mixtures and diversity of uses, businesses and people. Anywho, realistically there are only a dozen or so historically/architecturally significant buildings downtown (I mean you could probably knock down a majority of the crossroads and not get a peep from historic preservationists) that doesn't they are expendable. All of these background buildings create the context and connective tissue that makes the area urban, diverse and interesting..........

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:22 pm

I see your point. What is being lost for the P&L district is one a very small portion of our actual old urban core buildings and two not very impressive to begin with.

I'm a big building hugger but we haven't really lost much in this latest round of development....a couple 2-4 story buildings and now one 8 story.

ComandanteCero · Post by **ComandanteCero** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:30 pm

yeah, I just hope it's not one of those processes where you don't see the effect over the course of a year, but give it a decade and you've lost a sizable chunk of urban fabric, to be replaced by parking garages or single use districts........

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:33 pm

I'd take the P&L district over what was there.....surface lots, basketball building, strip club, etc. other 2 story buildings. I'm sure we won't look back and cry that we lost Nighmare's haunted house.

Good to keep track of these thing though, but must also keep this in perspective of the entire downtown area....it's not a huge deal losing what we've lost. We're finally winning things.

FangKC · Post by **FangKC** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:02 pm

Abbott is not going to be talking about the condition of the building anytime soon because of a confidentiality agreement that's in place until the sale is complete.

Yes, the local preservation community is pretty anemic. A paper tiger at best. The lack of a public response from them on the possible demolition of the Empire Theater was very disturbing to me.

In the three years since I moved to Kansas City, I can't recall one building that has been saved as a result of any public effort led by Historic KC Foundation. Two buildings on the National Register of Historic Places have been demolished (National Garage), or will be demolished (Law Building), in the last six months and nary a peep out of that group.

They certainly aren't a proactive preservation group (saving buildings before they become threatened). They appear to be more reactive, and one could argue that they're not a very effective reactive group either.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:07 pm

that came from Abbott I assume? i contacted Crawford and they didn't know the buyer.

FangKC · Post by **FangKC** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:18 pm

So did Crawford Architects back out of their plans to move into the Law Building when Abbott couldn't get financing? It would seem to me that they could have bought the building from him and had it renovated.

KC0KEK · Post by **KC0KEK** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:34 pm

Anybody planning to document the Law Building demo for the KC Photos section?

scooterj · Post by **scooterj** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 6:00 pm

KC0KEK wrote:Anybody planning to document the Law Building demo for the KC Photos section?

I'd have a pretty good view of it if I could see more than 10 feet outside my window anytime so far this year.

KC Kropf · Post by **KC Kropf** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 7:19 pm

It's on my way to the office, I can try to take as many pics as possible. They already have the walls up around it.

Dr. Know · Post by **Dr. Know** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:23 pm

Fang KC wrote

Yes, the local preservation community is pretty anemic. A paper tiger at best. The lack of a public response from them on the possible demolition of the Empire Theater was very disturbing to me. In the three years since I moved to Kansas City, I can't recall one building that has been saved as a result of any public effort led by Historic KC Foundation. Two buildings on the National Register of Historic Places have been demolished (National Garage), or will be demolished (Law Building), in the last six months and nary a peep out of that group. They certainly aren't a proactive preservation group (saving buildings before they become threatened). They appear to be more reactive, and one could argue that they're not a very effective reactive group either

.

KCPowercat wrote

Actually Flynn is usually pretty outspoken if it's actually something worth saving. Her lack of comment tells me a lot.

Comandantecero wrote

you know, when all the local historic preservationist can say is "â€œIt would be an unfortunate occurrence,â€

ignatius · Post by **ignatius** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:26 pm

What are going in the place of Law and National Garage? Please don't tell me they are surface lots!

ComandanteCero · Post by **ComandanteCero** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:27 pm

i think it's garages.

Tosspot · Post by **Tosspot** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:28 pm

ComandanteCero wrote:i think it's garages.

Almost as bad.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:34 pm

nobody knows what's going in either spot. National garage was an eyesore that was a risk to walk beside....it almost had to be destroyed. What will replace it might very well not be very sexy.

The law building spot is still up for debate as to what is going to happen to it.

ignatius · Post by **ignatius** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:40 pm

Not surprised. I don't understand this garage craze. We have more downtown parking per sq. ft of office space than most any Midwestern city, over 40K spots. And 40K is plenty for night time/weekends, even with the arena and possible ballpark.

Also, all garages should be required to have streetfront retail with the garage well hidden, especially if there are any tax breaks or public financing. I was really disappointed that the Library garage had no retail at ground level. Total waste of opportunity for retail to serve the nearby residents.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:41 pm

Nobody has said what either of these sites will become. Unless CC has some information he'd like to share with the group.