Marketplace
![[SeMissourian.com]](http://www.semissourian.com/images/nameplate.gif)
|
|
Fog/Mist ~ River stage: 26.14 Rising Monday, July 6, 2009 |
RSS
 Print
 Email link
 Respond to editor
 Read comments (11)
 Share link
Plans for Broadway building sale cause dustupSaturday, September 22, 2007
This week, Richard Themm had a terse phone conversation with Terri Foley, Old Town Cape's president and a historical preservation consultant. Foley was upset to learn that a potential buyer was looking into having the building, at 633-637 Broadway, demolished. She said Elroy Newton, a St. Louis businessman, contacted Old Town Cape to see if they would fight demolition plans. "We're willing to work with anybody on rehabbing a building or putting a new building on a vacant lot," Foley said, but not "for demolishing one of the oldest buildings on Broadway." Richard Themm said there's no way he can forbid potential buyers from demolishing the shop and he'll be unhappy if, eight months into working with a potential buyer, the sale falls through. Repeated efforts to contact Newton were unsuccesful. Built in the early to mid-1860s by German immigrant Julius Vasterling, the two-story building has been a dry goods shop, the Pine Saloon, a meat market and a soda shop. "It was our dream to have a business downstairs and live upstairs," Donna Themm said. "It was just too big a project." The Cape Girardeau couple wanted to restore the structure, but financing fell through and building codes stymied them. "The building's pretty much in the same shape as it was three years ago," Richard Themm said. "It was just not a job for weekend warriors." The Themms decided put it on the market in July 2006. They are asking $150,000. Some architectural details, such as custom-made iron pillars on the facade, frosted and etched glass above the showcase windows and small glazed tiles near the doorstep hint at what the building once was. Foley said the German Vernacular-style building is the last piece of history at Broadway and Sprigg Street. Rehabbing buildings, she said, saves a community's heritage, puts money back into the local economy and reduces the pull on resources needed for hauling away old brick, wood and metal, as well as the energy and nonrenewable resources required for all-new materials. She pointed to subsidies -- of up to 20 percent from the federal government and 25 percent from the state -- for historic buildings. But Julius Vasterling's former shop would need to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Themms said they didn't know how to do that. "I appreciate Old Town Cape and what they stand for, but I don't think they understand what they're getting into," Richard Themm said. He wonders why he's hearing from Foley and others now. "Where were they at a year ago? Where were they at all along? They should have bought it a year ago." For now, the space is empty, subject to small repeated acts of vandalism, Richard Themm said. 335-6611, extension 127 Comments  Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on semissourian.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
|
|
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook
Furl
Reddit
Google
We can only hope that the new owner demolishes the crumbling eyesore, and builds a new structure. The mortor holding the bricks together is little more than dust. It's not too far away from collapsing onto the street like the apartment building did a block away a couple of years ago.
"Where were they at a year ago?" Darn good question. If they want to save it so bad, they can do the leg work to get it on the National Register of Historic Places. I've done it for a couple of sites here in Souther California - and its no small feat. Not something I would have done if hadn't been collecting a paycheck to do it.
Why would you want this historic treasure demoed for a parking lot? This is our history in Cape, I would truly hate to see this old of a building lost. Our ancestors built these building, why should we loose them? Yes it needs a lot of work, but it would look GREAT fixed and repaired. Then the corner of Sprigg and Broadway would sparkle again.
The owners of this building can do what they want to with this building (within the law) since THEY own it.
I always like busy bodies pokin their nose into other people's business at a point in time like this.
Perhaps Old Town Cape should look into appointing a new president who is a bit more savvy in dealing with the public/property owners -- as well as offering a point in the right direction on how they can get the information and help they need to turnaround their historic property instead of calling them up for terse conversations.
As jakebanzai said, getting on national registers is not easy -- rehabbing blighted properties is not easy either. The Themm's are only asking $150,000 for their property -- OTC should look into getting some investors together and start buying up some of this property in danger.
I think both parties messed up, as did the city of Cape. First of all, the present owners should have done their homework before purchasing the property, and when they found out that they'd bitten off more than they could chew THEY should have tried to find resources to help them. The Old Town Cape group is very public, in the paper quite often, and if the owners were really planning to rehab this building you'd think they would have gotten familiar with the community, resources such as this available to them, etc.
Old Town Cape should have contacted the owners as soon as they purchased the property. Sort of like the Welcome Wagon. That's all they should have done. Very simple to do and they should be kicking themselves for not being more proactive.
The last group that is in the wrong here is the city of Cape. Once again, someone trying to do something here runs into the horrific problems of dealing with the city's codes and the inspectors. I've done this on more than one occasion. Long story short is that you can rarely get a straight answer on the meaning of a complicated code. WHen you do, one person tells you something & even can put it in writing, but when they come to inspect (sometimes even the same guy), they have a different tale. It's a mess.
There's no good guy or bad guy here, just 3 groups that screwed up.
"But Julius Vasterling's former shop would need to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Themms said they didn't know how to do that."
They should have looked to Southeast Missouri State U for help. I guess they didn't realize that there's a historic preservation major that has a class which requires the students to pick buildings to create a filing for the National Register of Historic Places. It's why there's "Old Town Cape" in the first place! If they had gone to either Old Town Cape (which they should have done) the word would have gotten out and then they would have been able to have gotten the help they needed.
I may be a business major but I know that they have an amazing resource here that they didn't look into and because of it they shot themselves in the foot.
I used to be a historic pres major and still have the book that we were to read for HP 100. It should be a suggested class for business majors wanting to work or run a business in a smaller town as it would be more likely that a small business would be located in a historic district like Old Town Cape is.
"But Julius Vasterling's former shop would need to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Themms said they didn't know how to do that."
They should have looked to Southeast Missouri State U for help. I guess they didn't realize that there's a historic preservation major that has a class which requires the students to pick buildings to create a filing for the National Register of Historic Places. It's why there's "Old Town Cape" in the first place! If they had gone to either Old Town Cape (which they should have done) the word would have gotten out and then they would have been able to have gotten the help they needed.
I may be a business major but I know that they have an amazing resource here that they didn't look into and because of it they shot themselves in the foot.
I used to be a historic pres major and still have the book that we were to read for HP 100. It should be a suggested class for business majors wanting to work or run a business in a smaller town as it would be more likely that a small business would be located in a historic district like Old Town Cape is.
Android, it's not just old but there's other factors that come into play to make it a historic site which it looks like the owners didn't look into, or didn't know how to go about doing it.
There are three factors that make an old building worthy being put on the National Register of historic places and hence eligible for tax credits and funding to restore it. The first and most obvious is the age of the building. The fact that it was build in the 1860's makes is definitely important in terms of the age of the building.
The second is if it has a connection to a historic figure or national event. This does not have to be a nationally known figure; as in the case of Port Cape, but it does have to be at least regionally significant. This part of the process is the one that takes the most time to determine. Historic preservation majors have to take a class where they are required to look up information in the Missouri Archives in Jackson and the county register, trying to find information on a person who lived at the location (generally not a famous individual) and the address. This is the process which they heard probably heard that they would have to pay for but didn't realize that there are individuals that need the practice doing this in their back yard that might do it for free or a small amount of money.
The third factor is that of architectural significance. The age easily factors in here as well as the type of building. Is there any other buildings like it in the area? If so it might lessen the historic value of it slightly but in concert with other factors might not have made it so bad.
A historic preservation major probably would pull their eye-teeth for the chance to research a building like this to put in their portfolio.
Tear it down. Then, leave the lot empty. That's my vote.
Terri Foley is passionate about saving the historic built environment, but I do agree that OTC should have watched that particular building much more closely considering its significance, and done something before now.
German vernacular architecture is disappearing at an alarming rate in this community...I should know, I've taken all the historic preservation classes, participated in area surveys, completed a national register for a local building here, and received a degree in history/HP. I DO know what it takes to get a building through the SHPO (State Historic Pres. Office)...and although it is no "walk in the park" it is certainly not impossible. The HP department at SEMO could most likely find a student in HP588 to conduct a national register. I'd do it myself if I weren't already swamped with another National Register Nomination.
The property owners certainly retain the right to sell, or demolish the building. In HP I like to think that we should pick and choose our battles, as potentially historic built environments are demolished daily, but I assure those skeptics that this building IS historic for its architecture and service to the developing community...and its loss would be devastating in the HP community. There is no equivalent. I'm surprised that a total of 45% tax credits isn't perking up the ears of a savvy investor.
Android, actually I did and what you wrote was essentially, "it's not a historic site, tear it down." I stated that "it should be one and this is why." Those are most certainly not the same thing.
Curthe, thank you for affirming what I had thought. It's good to know that I'm not the only one around here that knows that there's resources here that could (or might still be) used to garner support (monetarily as well as historically) for a building such as this.