Reasons for Saving The Empire Theater

[FangKC]

Reasons for Saving the Empire Theater

* It has great potential as a multipurpose entertainment facility (i.e. nightclub, ballroom, performance space).

* Its potential conversion and reuse as a ballroom and multipurpose venue would make it distinct from other facilities like the Folly, Midland, and Lyric theaters. Those facilities have fixed seating and no kitchen facilities for banquets. The Empire's square footage could be expanded on its west side; it could be reconfigured to have a level floor, a kitchen, removable and portable seating and tables, and be outfitted for live television broadcasts. It could also host dinner theater which the Folly, Midland, and Lyric theaters cannot.

* Because of its history, federal, state, and local preservation tax credits are available for its renovation. Preservation tax credits wouldn't be available for construction of a new structure. Using these credits makes federal and state tax money available that would otherwise not be. In essence, renovating an existing historic structure can be less expensive than building new, because this additional preservation money (from outside) helps pay for the cost of redevelopment.

* It is an ideal anchor for a future entertainment district.

* It is located close to future parking facilities, the proposed downtown arena, the convention center, and hotels. It is easily-accessed from major highways.

* It is the only remaining structure downtown that incorporates a dome in its architecture. Its exterior is unique and distinct.

* It has a significant history as an entertainment venue in Kansas City.

* Buildings like the Empire cannot be replicated; one they are lost, they are gone forever.

* It is one of four remaining examples (Folly, Midland, Uptown) of architecture used in grand movie palaces from before the Depression.

* It is part of the visual fabric of downtown. It is visually different than any new structure that could replace it.

* Incorporating historic structures in city planning pays because it creates and maintains a sense of identity for a city. It promotes historic tourism, which is among the fastest-growing types of tourism nationally. Renovating one historic structure can help redevelopment on an entire area (examples: New Amsterdam Theater in New York City; Cadillac Place and Oriental theaters in Chicago).

* Saving historic structures like the Empire Theater is politically smart and popular with the public. Kansas Citians have in the past supported refurbishing Union Station; the old Post Office on Pershing; converting First National Bank into the new downtown public library; and the Liberty Memorial.

* The Empire Theater holds special memories for many Kansas Citians. Because many older Kansas Citians have memories of going to the Empire, and since it played a role in their daily lives, it will be easier to rally support for saving it than other historic structures that might not have had such a public function.

* Historic and architecturally-diverse urban landscapes are more charming. This "charm factor" draws tourists to cities like San Francisco, Savannah, Charleston, New York, Chicago, New Orleans, and Boston.

* Historic and architecturally-unique entertainment districts have proven successful in Kansas City. The Country Club Plaza is distinct because of its architecture, fountains, and public art. Westport is distinct because of its history. It makes sense to include this aspect in any future downtown entertainment district.

Rebuttals Against Advocates of Tearing Down the Empire

* "It's too expensive and unfeasable to save." Lots of historic structures are expensive to renovate. However, that is not a reason to tear them down. Preservation tax credits are available on the federal, local, and state levels to restore historic buildings. These grants and tax credits can reduce renovation costs anywhere from 40-60 percent. This money is not available for construction of new buildings. After demolition costs and construction of a new building, little money is actually saved by the new building.

* "Much of the interior was destroyed in past renovations and because of dividing the theater space into smaller theaters." While the entire building cannot be restored to its original condition, many elements can be saved or reproduced. The fact that it is not in its original condition doesn't mean that it cannot be renovated and a new use found for it. Sometimes because original elements have been destroyed or lost, it makes it easier to refurbish and reconfigure the space for a new use. There is less need to please strident preservationists who want it only returned to its pristine condition, which might prevent any efforts to modify and expand it for a new use.

* "A better use could be found for the site." Bridges has not stated what he will build there. How do we know what he'll propose will be better than we already have? So far his temporary solution is a park. How many people will actually use a park at that location? It sits right next to a freeway--with car exhaust and noise as a constant companion. Downtown parks like Oppenheimer and Davis are certainly not bustling with use and they are much closer to downtown workers. Any park there would probably be frequented by vagrants, and with past examples of park use, probably be covered with graffiti and litter in no time.

* "We already have the Midland and Folly Theaters as examples of old Depression-Era movie palaces. Why do we need another one?" While that is true, each of those theaters is architecturally different from the Empire. They serve as performing arts centers. The Empire could become a multipurpose entertainment venue. It could be converted into a facility that hosts dinner; theater, extended runs of Broadway shows; parties; speeches; televised events; a banquet hall for clubs and other organizations; and a ballroom for conventioneers. This type of space could also be rented out as a part-time nightclub to private entities like House of Blues, B.B. King's Blues Club, etc., which don't want to invest in their own permanent infastructure. The Midland and Folly are not currently configured to be this flexible.

* "The Midland and Folly theaters are expensive to maintain and require private support to fund them." One of the reasons for that is because they are limited to only being performing arts centers. The Empire doesn't necessarily have to be. If it was modified for several uses, it would be easier to create the additional sources of revenue that I've indicated above.

In addition, the west side of that block could be developed to produce income that would subsidize the Empire. A hotel (or office tower) could face Baltimore, and sit above any annex that would be constructed to expand the square footage of the ballroom itself. Restaurants and nightclubs in the base of the tower would also generate income. A hotel could use the Empire as its ballroom as well. Carnegie Hall in New York City has a large office tower constructed adjacent to it that subsidizes the cost of maintaining that performance space. The Empire could share its heating and air conditioning sources with the tower on the west.

* "It's an embarrassment to the City, and turns off visitors." It's only an embarrassment because it was allowed to deteriorate in the first place. Union Station and the Liberty Memorial were at one time embarrassments for the City, but they were cleaned up and renovated. The Empire can be as well. Watch how fast Bridges proposed park turns into an embarrassment when it is overrun with vagrants and litter.

* "An office tower or parking garage there would bring more people downtown." Yes it would during the day (9-5), then after 5 pm it would be a dead zone--just like other parts of downtown. Renovating the Empire into a multipurpose entertainment venue would bring more people downtown on nights and weekends. It would also add to the proposed entertainment district. Besides, there are plenty of other vacant parcels in which to build office building or parking garages.

* "It has sit empty for so long, and it's delaying any redevelopment of the area." It has sit empty only because developers like Stan Durwood and Larry Bridges sat on the property for speculation purposes, instead of seeing it as an asset that could bring life back downtown. Bridges has already stated that he has no plans for developing the site right now, and plans to create a temporary park. It doesn't appear that the site will be part of any redevelopment effort anytime soon.

* "There's no support among residents for saving historic structures." That is not true. Union Station, the Pershing Road Post Office, and Liberty Memorial are examples of the public's support for saving historic structures.

* "There isn't enough money to save it. Public funds are needed for other projects--like the downtown library, the proposed arena, and performing arts center." There are perservation tax credits and grants available from federal, state, and local sources. Those funds don't require bond issues or tax levies. It's foolish not to make use of monies that are set aside for this purpose. They reduce the cost of renovation measurably and make saving existing structures economically-feasible. If we don't take advantage of these funds, other cities will.