52 replies to this topic

[Dystopos]

blackcoffee&bourbon, on Jul 22 2007, 08:18 AM, said:

wait, wait, wait... they're tearing this down for a parking lot?!??!? no way.  any movement in b'ham to save this building? 11 spaces? i am speechless.  

There was some movement, but since (A) it's privately owned and the owner was in no mood to be swayed, and (B) media coverage of the controversy was limited, the movement gained little momentum.

The lot will have over 100 spaces. 11 is my own calculation of how much of the proposed lot is occupied by the historic structure.

[3choBoomer]

http://www.al.com/bi...y.ata?g_id=3809

At least they're saving the sign

[Dystopos]

3choBoomer, on Sep 6 2007, 08:35 AM, said:

http://www.al.com/bi...y.ata?g_id=3809

At least they're saving the sign

I took this photo after work yesterday:

[Dystopos]

And I took this one last week:

[Southron]

Truly sad to see it gone.  Too bad the News didn't leave it on the corner and just tear down the ugly attached production building.

[j.midtown]

  I have to say I'm shocked and saddened by this demolition. I was just marveling at the building when I was last in downtown Birmingham back in the spring.  It's a terrible loss and shows a complete lack of sensitivity to history and beauty.  

If that had been in Atlanta today, there are people who would have practically killed to save it (and convert to condos... :-) ).

[woob]

j.midtown, on Dec 5 2007, 09:18 PM, said:

  I have to say I'm shocked and saddened by this demolition. I was just marveling at the building when I was last in downtown Birmingham back in the spring.  It's a terrible loss and shows a complete lack of sensitivity to history and beauty.  

If that had been in Atlanta today, there are people who would have practically killed to save it (and convert to condos... :-) ).

Why would they do that.. the building actually seemed to be in good shape? unlike half the buildings down there???

[Dystopos]

woob, on Dec 5 2007, 09:19 PM, said:

Why would they do that.. the building actually seemed to be in good shape? unlike half the buildings down there???

It was the owner's decision to tear it down and provide a parking lot for employees. He was unwilling to give up control of the property and characterized the proposals he had for its re-use as infeasible.

I am not aware that anyone except the owner thought that tearing it down was a good idea. I am not aware that anyone except the owner had the authority to overrule his decision. The city's design review committee made a feeble effort, succeeding only in delaying his permit by 6 months. Under current law if he had decided to proceed without a permit, he would only have been subject to a nominal fine and some bad publicity. He controls, of course, the city's primary outlet for publicity.

[rolltider]

Dystopos, on Dec 6 2007, 12:25 PM, said:

It was the owner's decision to tear it down and provide a parking lot for employees. He was unwilling to give up control of the property and characterized the proposals he had for its re-use as infeasible.

I am not aware that anyone except the owner thought that tearing it down was a good idea. I am not aware that anyone except the owner had the authority to overrule his decision. The city's design review committee made a feeble effort, succeeding only in delaying his permit by 6 months. Under current law if he had decided to proceed without a permit, he would only have been subject to a nominal fine and some bad publicity. He controls, of course, the city's primary outlet for publicity.

How much more hypocritical can the News be.  About a week ago, maybe in the Sunday Edition (1/21/08), there was an article criticizing the City's proposed demolition of Boutwell Auditorium.

[kayman]

That's the Birmingham News for ya!  They believe that the right to be criticize is held exclusively to everyone, but themselves.   They want to tell everyone else to be pro-urbanism, yet their long term plans for their properties are some of the most anti-urban I've seen for a business in the City Center.

[Dystopos]

rolltider, on Jan 27 2008, 10:32 AM, said:

How much more hypocritical can the News be.  About a week ago, maybe in the Sunday Edition (1/21/08), there was an article criticizing the City's proposed demolition of Boutwell Auditorium.

That editorial was written by a guest contributor, not by the paper's editorial staff, much less by the paper's owner, who is alone responsible for the decision to demolish the 1917 building.

Edited by Dystopos, 28 January 2008 - 05:13 PM.

[SaveOurHistory]

The saddest part about all of this was it is not even enough parking for the employees.  The overwhelming majority of employees will continue parking in leased spaces in other nearby Birmingham lots.  That lot is primarily for executives, a few department directors and a handful of editorial staff.  In other words, the historic building was demolished for the sake of some privileged parking spaces.   Sad.  Sadder still is the fact that the public won't even remember it.   Certainly not to the point that the New York owners of The News take notice.  After all, the general public doesn't even seem to acknowledge or take heed of the fact that it is privately owned by a family from New York.  Makes you sad to think about it.   But then they are used to this sort of thing in New York, I guess (just watch Yankee Stadium being demolished in a couple of years).  Points to one fact that unfortunately is all too common here in Birmingham.  If The News doesn't cover it (and of course they certainly weren't going to cover this one in thorough style) then it just doesn't get covered.  TV and radio are virtually non-existent when it comes to journalism, unless it interrupts your daily commute.  That doesn't bode well for the future and that should make all current and former journalists truly sad.

[Jim856796]

Southron, on Nov 30 2007, 10:30 AM, said:

Truly sad to see it gone.  Too bad the News didn't leave it on the corner and just tear down the ugly attached production building.

Is the Production Building still gonna be torn down?