LEXINGTON | CentrePointe | 388 FT | 30 FL | Pro [Archive]

seicer

March 5th, 2008, 04:49 PM

406 feet of glass and steel (http://www.kentucky.com/454/story/337520.html)
Project would fill downtown block
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, March 5, 2008

A massive $250 million construction project that would add a 40-story tower to downtown Lexington and reshape one of the best-recognized corners in town was announced on Tuesday.

The developers, The Webb Companies, said the project would include a major four-star, 243-room hotel, 77 residential condominium units and 26,000 square feet of retail space. It also would have a 10,000-square-foot restaurant on the top floor.

The 406-foot-tall glass-and-steel structure would be roughly as tall as the 30-story Lexington Financial Center, known affectionately as the "Big Blue building." It will have 10 more floors than the Financial Center because a hotel does not require the amount of infrastructure, such as duct work, between floors that an office building does.

The building has a stair-stepped look, with the first street-level section at four stories, then sections of 12 and 13 stories, with the main tower in the center.

Architects say this approach will help keep the street-level building in scale with nearby older buildings on Main Street.

Developers said they plan to pursue "an aggressive schedule" to have the new building completed in time for the Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games in fall 2010.

However, on Tuesday afternoon, when the developers presented their project to the Urban County Council, councilman Dick DeCamp said of the timetable: "That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard." DeCamp said this will be a "landmark project, right in the center of our downtown."

The city needs to go slow and give it a great deal of thought, he said.

Councilman Jay McChord praised The Webb Companies for their "vision and willingness to take risks, especially in the downtown."

The project's reach would extend beyond the block bounded by Vine, Main, Limestone and Upper, where it will be built.

The project, known as CentrePointe, would require 1,100 parking spaces. About 650 of those will be in an underground parking garage on site.

To accommodate the rest of the parking, the developer proposed taking land from Phoenix Park at Main and Limestone. Overall, the size of the park will be reduced by about one-third, said architect Charlie Barnhart.

With that space, the developers will build two levels of underground parking, 15,000 square feet of ground-level retail and a four-level parking garage above ground. The remainder of Phoenix Park will be restored and include public art.

Webb said Phoenix Park was built as a temporary park to dress up downtown as the city got ready to host the NCAA finals in 1985. He said he was committing $4 million to improve the park. People will get from the Phoenix Park garage to the hotel via a skywalk, Webb said later.

On the north-facing wall of the new parking structure in the park, the developers plan to add a Jumbotron screen that would allow for showing outdoor movies and could be used during the Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games, and for other events.

The screens would be viewable from the courthouse plaza along Limestone.

The proposed mixed-use project is expected to have a significant economic impact on the local economy, the developers said. It will generate approximately 2,500 construction jobs annually, for two years. After it is completed, approximately 919 jobs will be generated annually.

Asked whether the city needs another hotel, Webb said it needs a high-end hotel. When the University of Kentucky and local law firms want to put guests in four-star hotels, they take them to Cincinnati, he said.

Success of the CentrePointe hotel project relies on Tax Increment Financing, which has been used to finance other mega-developments in the state, including Louisville's Museum Plaza project.

In general, the program allows developers to recoup large portions of their investment in mixed-use commercial, residential and retail projects by keeping the income and property taxes generated by the project over a 30-year period. TIF funds would be used to finance public infrastructure.

Darby Turner, attorney for The Webb Companies, said the TIF application requires a public hearing for citizen comment.

The TIF financing requires approval by the Urban County Council and the state. Louisville has five TIF projects, Northern Kentucky has two. A separate proposal to pursue TIF financing for a new basketball arena in downtown Lexington is currently being studied.

Webb said there is a "very good chance" that the project could draw international investors. Webb is chairman of The Webb Companies; his nephew Woodford Webb is president. The company has built several buildings downtown.

All of the buildings now on the block would be demolished, an idea that already has sparked controversy among historic preservation groups, including the Blue Grass Trust and Preserve Lexington. Music enthusiasts also are concerned about existing businesses such as the Dame nightclub.

Hayward Wilkirson, one of the organizers of Preserve Lexington, said in an e-mail on Tuesday that "the thousands of Lexingtonians that are contacting us, believe that the spirit of this development can be altered in such a way as to preserve the vital historic resources that already exist on this block." A project that showcases cutting edge architecture married to the preservation of historic architecture will enhance Lexington's legacy as a cultural center, Wilkirson said.

Harold Tate, president of the Downtown Development Authority, said he has received several phone calls from people interested in helping businesses on the block relocate, but he said those businesses also need to seek out the DDA's help.

Mayor Jim Newberry said the city was going to work "diligently" to keep businesses currently in the block in the downtown area.

Councilwoman Andrea James asked whether the development would include affordable housing units. Webb said no, because land costs were too expensive.

Vice Mayor Jim Gray applauded the Webbs for "aspirational thinking" and daring to dream big dreams but said he wanted more time to study the project. At first glance, Gray said, he was concerned about its size and whether it was inviting at sidewalk level.

"My concern is scale. We have a small downtown. This is a big project," he said.

The Saturday Lexington Farmers Market, currently held on Vine Street on the block, would be moved to a nearby site, Tate said. Possible other locations are somewhere else on Vine Street, in front of the new courthouses, or around the old courthouse.

Webb said an announcement on which hotel franchise will manage the hotel will be made in the next few weeks.

Teaming up with the Webbs on the CentrePointe development is J.H. Anderson Holdings. John Anderson is a graduate of the University of Kentucky and a national and international hotel developer.

Developers said they hope to have excavation completed and start laying the building's foundation in mid-August. The last skyscraper built downtown was the Financial Center in 1987.

How tall is it?
Lexington Financial Center 30 floors 410 ft.
Proposed CentrePointe 40 floors 406 ft.
Kincaid Towers 22 floors 333 ft.
Louisville Museum Plaza 62 floors 703 ft.

madtony8k

March 5th, 2008, 06:34 PM

It's dissapointing that they would build something 4 ft shorter than the current tallest. I don't know where the news got 430 ft :( or where 450 came from??

Tricia_Lvs_Baltimore

March 5th, 2008, 06:39 PM

Nice-looking tower!!

Ian604

March 5th, 2008, 06:44 PM

Thanks Tricia!

gt7834a

March 5th, 2008, 08:12 PM

Hey Seicer,
What is the 'proposed highrise' on High that I see on your map? I don't remember seeing anything on this.
Thanks

seicer

March 5th, 2008, 08:33 PM

That's been often discussed here as something of a curiosity. There were rumors floating around for years about a mid-rise (I should correct that) on the parking lot next to Common Grounds. I haven't heard anything regarding it in over a year though.

Lexcity

March 5th, 2008, 09:38 PM

Ian, can you tell me how to post a picture directly on this forum?

seicer

March 5th, 2008, 10:42 PM

^ Host it on a place like Photobucket, then copy the URL of the image and use the [ i m g ] URL [ / i m g ] function (or click the image icon above) to post an image.

Blue Grass Trust 'disappointed' in downtown project (http://www.kentucky.com/181/story/337980.html)
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, March 5, 2008

The Blue Grass Trust for Historic Preservation issued a statement Wednesday saying it was disappointed that numerous buildings that "most agree have historical significance to Lexington will be destroyed" by a redevelopment of the Main Street block with a 40-story hotel tower.

"We hope that as the plans are further developed and the input of all of the citizens of Lexington is received, that the plans can be revised to accommodate the preservation of these historic structures," the statement said.

The hotel, condominiums and retail space in the $250 million CentrePointe project would take the entire block bounded by Main, Upper and Vine streets and Limestone. Among the businesses on the block are The Dame music club, Buster's bar and Mia's bar and restaurant.

Julie Good, executive director of the trust, said earlier this week that Lexington's premier historic-preservation group advocates redevelopment of the block, but in a way that blends the new with the historical.

The trust said Tuesday that it hopes to be invited to discussions with developers and the public to explain its position.

Ian604

March 6th, 2008, 02:22 AM

Ian, can you tell me how to post a picture directly on this forum?

Like Seicer said if you get a photobucket account and you'll have an IMG option below the photo. Copy the URL in that box and paste it here and that should work. If it doesnt work get back to me and i'll try being more specific.

Ian604

March 6th, 2008, 08:12 AM

This is just a copy/paste from my post at the Lexington Development News thread but i thought i'd add it here also to make the point...

I dont think it will look as awkward as you think. For example when you're walking toward downtown on Mill St. from the south LFC and Kincaid appear to be the same height and i kind of like illusion of equal height.

Not to mention Montreal's three tallest are roughly the same height and they have a beautiful skyline.

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i120/Iandependant/0001-2.jpg

seicer

March 6th, 2008, 04:06 PM

CENTREPOINTE'S PLACE IN DOWNTOWN LEXINGTON
Sizing up the project (http://www.kentucky.com/454/story/338477.html)
Concerns swirl over plans for skyscraper
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, March 6, 2008

http://media.kentucky.com/smedia/2008/03/05/23/651-0306a1Centerpointe.standalone.prod_affiliate.79.jpg

A rendering of a 40-story skyscraper proposed for downtown Lexington has stirred debate beyond whether to preserve a dozen historic buildings on the block and the entertainment businesses they house.

A day after the project was officially announced, some architects and others raised this question: How big is too big?

The $250 million CentrePointe project -- with a 273-room hotel, 77 condominiums and 26,000 square feet of retail space -- would take the entire block bounded by Main, Upper and Vine streets and North Limestone.

"It's very troubling because of its size," said Graham Pohl, a Lexington architect who frequently writes about architecture.

Vice Mayor Jim Gray, who expressed concern about the scale of the buildings at the Urban County Council's Tuesday work session, said the Downtown Master Plan that cost $400,000 and involved input from hundreds of citizens called for a maximum building height of 15 stories in the downtown core.

"You can't ask people for their input, get community consensus and then ignore it," he said.

That recommendation in the downtown plan was taken out when the plan went before the Planning Commission for approval. The commission said it needed more study, said Harold Tate, president of the Downtown Development Authority.

Charlie Barnhart, one of the architects for the project, described the skyscraper, with a stair-step look at several different heights, as "very responsive to the scale of buildings in downtown Lexington." The base of the building is "intentionally limited to four stories in direct response to the Courthouse Area guidelines," he said.

Much of the block is in the Courthouse Design Review Area, and subject to design guidelines. One guideline said that new construction should appear similar in mass and scale to nearby buildings.

The 406-foot tower, Barnhart said, will not be seen by pedestrians on the street. "To see the tower, you have to get on the edge of the street and look straight up," he said.

To some early critics of the proposed development, drawings of the building released Tuesday appear to show other problems: stretches of concrete wall along the sidewalk, shops that can be entered only from an interior mall, skywalks and a pedestrian-unfriendly feeling.

However, Barnhart said those impressions are wrong. He said the drawing is meant to show only the building's mass, not design details such as columns and storefronts. "That's the risk of showing a design that is not finished," he said. "The design is still evolving."

On North Limestone and Upper, the CentrePointe building would have retail shops accessible from the sidewalk with large windows and awnings, Barnhart said. All retail space could be entered from the outside.

Many cities are pulling down skywalks built in the 1980s as a way to get people walking on sidewalks. The CentrePointe development shows two skyways -- one connecting the hotel to a proposed garage on part of Phoenix Park on North Limestone, another connecting to the Financial Center garage on Upper Street.

Barnhart said he did not know whether the skywalks "will ultimately survive" or be eliminated.

Others who saw the plan also questioned why it appears to be oriented toward Vine Street instead of Main Street. But developer Dudley Webb said the main entrance to the hotel will be on Main Street with a circular drive, a covered entrance, brass revolving doors and a doorman. There will also be an entrance to the hotel off Vine Street with some parking for guests.

David Mohney, former dean of the University of Kentucky College of Design, raised concerns about the heft of the project, saying it appears too large for a downtown that "is small in size and small in scale." He said he thought there was "a whole range of little tweaks" that would improve its design.

He also said it is time Lexington had a professional peer review process established for new downtown buildings where other architects offer "tweaks that can tighten up the design."

The Blue Grass Trust for Historic Preservation issued a statement Wednesday saying it is disappointed that plans for the mixed-use project show that historic buildings on the site will be razed. The city's oldest preservation group said it backed redevelopment of the block, but wants it done in a way that blends the new with the historic.

While some other mixed-use projects downtown have struggled to fill their retail space, Webb expressed confidence in filling his space because of the 77 condominiums and guests coming to the hotel. "We have critical mass that can support retail," he said.

Webb said he already has commitments for 10,000 square feet of the retail space. Part of that will be for a wine, cheese and fruit store that Webb said will be locally owned.

Next week, a meeting of the CentrePointe architects, engineers and city representatives will be held to do further planning on the project.

Webb said interested groups or citizens can ask questions or express concerns to the project's architects and engineers by calling his office at (859) 253-0000.

seicer

March 6th, 2008, 04:11 PM

Responses from tourism industry vary widely (http://www.kentucky.com/211/story/338479.html)
By Jim Jordan, Herald-Leader, March 6, 2008

When a 267-room luxury hotel was proposed last month for the Kentucky Horse Park, managers of nearby hotels said the $90 million facility was unnecessary and unlikely to reach the occupancy levels forecast by developers.

On Tuesday, developers announced plans to build the $250 million CentrePointe complex, including a 243-room luxury hotel. The response from hotel and tourism executives ranged from muted to enthusiastic.

They said the CentrePointe hotel is downtown and won't offer direct competition to the Marriott Griffin Gate Resort and other hotels off I-75/64 near the Horse Park.

In addition, CentrePointe is expected to help the city attract more and larger conventions and meetings to the Lexington Convention Center, and it will meet the need of the University of Kentucky and downtown businesses for a luxury hotel for important visitors.

It also will satisfy the desires of aging, upscale baby-boomers for service, convenience and luxury, said David Lord, president of the Lexington Convention and Visitors Bureau.

The new attitude of many boomers is "if you give me quality, if you give me service, I'll pay the price," Lord said.

At CentrePointe, the price will be at least as high as the $175 a night proposed for the Horse Park Westin, but less than the $400 or more demanded by luxury hotels around the country, said Dudley Webb, one of CentrePointe's developers.

The CentrePointe hotel will be "a four-star plus" on a five-star scale, he said.

The hotel's occupancy projections will be made public in a few weeks when the developers file their application for tax increment financing. TIF allows some developers to get back part of their investment by keeping the income and property taxes generated by the project over a 30-year period.

The average occupancy of Lexington's downtown hotels increased 5.3 percent to about 65 percent in 2007, Lord said. It was 61.7 percent in 2006.

Meanwhile, the average room rate rose 6.1 percent "and that was reflective of the rest of the country," Lord said. "We don't always track the rest of the country, so that was good."

Larry Bell, general manager of the Hyatt Regency in the Lexington Center complex, declined to comment on the need for a new hotel about two blocks from the Hyatt.

Bell, who has previously managed the Webb-developed Radisson Plaza Hotel across Broadway from Lexington Center, agreed that the average downtown occupancy for hotels is "in the low to mid-60s" and said, "That's relatively anemic in comparison to other areas of the country."

"The hotel market in Lexington is challenging and so I'm sure it's difficult to get new projects financed ... particularly when your market is in the low- to mid-60s in occupancy percentage," Bell said.

He noted that the Hyatt is undergoing a complete renovation and said that project should provide "a bit of a lift to the market. As our hotel is renovated, Lexington should be more competitive for additional conventions, which should help everyone."

Lord said about 10 percent of the groups that decided not to meet in Lexington last year said it was because there are too few hotel rooms downtown. "These groups don't like to get on buses any more" and want to be within walking distance of events, he said.

But, Lord added, "the bar keeps being raised" by other cities. "Everybody else has to continue increasing their game, too," he said.

Webb said most major Lexington hotels, including those built by The Webb Cos., are 20 to 25 years old. Renovations at the Hyatt and Radisson will help attract tourists, but they won't meet the need for luxury rooms, he said.

"That upper end of the market, that's where we need to be," Webb said.

There's also room for the Westin at the Horse Park, he said. "They might perceive it (CentrePointe) as competition, but we don't perceive them as competition," he said. "They are in a totally different market."

Mark Jeffrey, general manager of the Marriott Griffin Gate Resort near the Horse Park, agreed with Webb that the I-75/64 area is a separate market that won't be greatly affected by CentrePointe.

"Downtown does not have an adequate number of quality guest rooms down there to support the (Lexington) center," said Jeffrey, who has strongly criticized the Horse Park hotel project.

CentrePointe "makes more sense" than the Horse Park hotel, he said. Besides, artist renderings of CentrePointe look "magnificent."

gt7834a

March 6th, 2008, 06:14 PM

I have no problem with constructive criticism, since I love to do it myself. That said, it is way easier to complain and cretic a project than it is to actually go out and do them yourself. I have never done anything near this large but I have worked on several large projects. There are a million things to balance and you cannot please everyone. No design will appeal to everyone either. It is really hard to balance the needs of a city to grow and change and to also make sure you do not lose your identity and character. I understand peoples concerns, I happen to like the design and think it offers more plusses than minuses, but that is just me. I think you have to keep these things in mind though when you read or hear people talking about these type of things. You almost always hear more people that complain about these things than like them because it is a big change and people tend to be skeptical, plus they like to sound smart. I never listen to other architects about projects like these. I have never heard one that wouldn't do it differently. I think it is a combo of taste, training and ego. Or at least that is my experience with it.

As to the 15 story height restriction, I think that is rediculous. Lots of new urbanist rail against skyscrapers, but you cannot have it both ways here in Lexington. You cannot tell people they cannot expand the Urban Service Boundary and they also cannot build tall buildings. I know it looks like we have a lot of empty lots but there is less than you think and what there is is hard to buy. If we want infill we have to give up something. Also, I like tall buildings. I think the big concern with tall buildings has to be street level and it appears from street level this will appear to be a 4 story building and will have street level retail. I think that is all that you can ask. There are always things that can be improved, but I really like what they have done. I was worried it would be like the FC and just be a tower with a big parking garage next to it which just kills the street level, but they have gone to the great expense of putting the parking underground and have brought the building out the sidewalk.

gt7834a

March 6th, 2008, 08:48 PM

BTW, they were out there core drilling today so they obviously plan on moving forward quickly with this thing. It will be interesting to see how the politics play out, ie if this gets held up by the council or if it gets approved quickly. Newberry seems to be clearly behind it but the council seems more reserved. They also have the TIF issues to worry about. I think getting rid of the TIF as it stands would be a terrible decision by the state. Having strong downtowns for their major metro areas can only help the state budget in the long run. Peopel can be very short sited about these things.

Lexcity

March 6th, 2008, 11:50 PM

During their presentation to the UC Council the Webbs quickly flashed through a few slides showing some architectural details of the building. I paused on those slides and took a picture of them off of my monitor which is why they are of poor quality; but here they are.

Here is a profile and head on view.
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii89/wbm82/Profile.jpg

Here is a possible ground floor layout.
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii89/wbm82/GroundFloorLayout.jpg

Here is the 5th floor layout.
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii89/wbm82/03-04-08_2325.jpg

seicer

March 7th, 2008, 01:11 AM

I posted a rant at another forum, and it accompanied these photos.

http://www.urbanup.net/content/20070629/photos/1_13_251.jpg
^ The tower will literally be in front of you. All of the buildings in the foreground would be demolished in the image. The ones in the immediate foreground are the ones I won't miss, given that they are non-historic or would make the property invaluable if kept. If the buildings along Limestone were demolished, those lots and the parking lot would make for a very attractive infill -- of say, something less than 15 stories.

http://www.urbanup.net/content/20071104/photos/full_1_2846.jpg
^ The building would be immediately in front of you. See that big white concrete wall? That's the Lexington Financial Center parking garage.

http://www.urbanup.net/content/20071104/photos/full_1_532.jpg
^ The dense collection of buildings in the lower left would be demolished.

http://www.urbanup.net/content/20071104/photos/full_1_1420.jpg
^ ...lower right.

http://www.urbanup.net/content/20071104/photos/full_1_229.jpg
^ This is the sampling along Limestone that I wouldn't care too much about if they were gone for infill on an more appropriate scale. While the Triple Crown Lounge on the left is a historic building, it could be relocated or infill could be designed around that corner structure. At any rate, the bar has since closed :( The ghost wall that you see is from the former Woolworth's building.

http://www.urbanup.net/content/20071108/photos/full_1_2702.jpg
^ The Webb Cos. design such beautiful downtown buildings.

http://www.urbanup.net/content/20071108/photos/full_1_2413.jpg
^ The failed Festival Market at bottom.

http://www.urbanup.net/content/20071104/photos/full_1_394.jpg
^ Such brown glory!

Ian604

March 7th, 2008, 05:22 AM

Could one of the mods add the official height of the tower on the thread title. It's 406'

SRG

March 7th, 2008, 05:33 AM

That's pretty cool for Lexington. I'm impressed.

cartomanlex

March 7th, 2008, 05:39 AM

Commercial office properties have 12-13 feet per floor while residential have 10-10 1/2 feet per floor. therein lies the difference.

gt7834a

March 7th, 2008, 02:40 PM

I don't think you can base your opinion on this building on what was built in the past, at least as far as style. Look around the country and you will see that every city in the country was building similar buildings. They are ugly, but so was the wide collar shirt you were wearing at the time. Styles change. It is part of the fabric of a city and why I don't think you can simply stop building and only keep old buildings. They were built over a period of time also and have differnt styles. The same needs to happen. That doesn't mean it has to be a 40 story tower, nor does it mean you should tear everything historic down, you obviously shouldn't, but I do think you need construction from differnt time periods including today. I have really enjoyed the additions recently to downtown and think they add a lot.

madtony8k

March 7th, 2008, 06:21 PM

haha.. that pedway in the last one is UUGGGGG!..

However, i do love the Kincaid tower. I think every building in Lexington is a little dated. You can look and tell about how long ago a given building was built. I think it would be the same with CentrePointe. It is the contemperary style today. It kind of looks like something that belongs in Buckhead, Atlanta. But, gt7834a is right, a lot of new buildings in other cities are looking like this.. it's the new style. But it works in each city because they all have nothing like it, and one of the best things for a city is veriety.

gt7834a

March 7th, 2008, 06:53 PM

I like Kincaid Tower and the Finacial Center buildings. I hate the World trade center complex(radison, etc). I actually like Triangle Center and at the time it was fantastic. It failed but the reason it ended up like it did had much more to do with KY Central than the Webbs. They went under and all their properties went with them(they owned 80%). The Webbs also did Victorian Square which saved a big section of our historic buildings and while not a roaring economic success is a fantastic addition to our downtown and is home to several good downtown establishments. The Webbs have their failures and their faults but to act like everything they have done has destroyed Lexington is rediculous and flat out wrong. It also is not a fair way to look at this project. Every project has to be looked at individually. Even if everything they did in the past was fanstastic it doesn't mean their next one will be.

cartomanlex

March 7th, 2008, 07:50 PM

I think that the reason the Triangle Center failed, was the location of the tenants inside the building. It was billed as a festival market style project and modeled on the Quincy Market/Harborfront/Portside developments. the theory behind it was that they were marketplaces in conjunction with a tourist destination. Quincy Market had Faneuil Hall, Harborfront had the Inner Harbor, Portside had the River front in Toledo Oh., these were the places that people went to as a destination. In Lexington, Triangle Center(Festival Market) was the destination.

The high priced items were placed on the first floor(clothing etc.), novelty and fad/collectibles on the second floor and lastly, the food court on the top floor. If you were working downtown and went out for lunch, you had to pass all the other stuff to get to stand in line, wait for your food, find a place to sit /go back down to exit the building, none of which was conducive to shopping. The other successful market had food on the first floor and shopping on the upper floors. When the majority of the traffic is just looking for something to eat, the arrangement became a problem and when the newness wore off the people went elsewhere. Limited basketball games and scarce concerts could not sustain the Lexington Center,Victorian Square and Festival Market for very long.

seicer

March 7th, 2008, 09:49 PM

Did anyone go to the Preserve Lexington meeting? I missed this month's :(

shane453

March 9th, 2008, 09:30 AM

Snazzy!

madtony8k

March 10th, 2008, 04:46 AM

I made a model for google earth. It's really rough, but it shows the general shape of the building and how it will fit in the skyline.

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/6934/cp6ss9.jpg

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/9877/cp5lz7.jpg

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/7848/cp4cz5.th.jpg (http://img297.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cp4cz5.jpg)
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/6632/cp3zn9.th.jpg (http://img297.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cp3zn9.jpg)
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/2758/cp2rx1.th.jpg (http://img297.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cp2rx1.jpg)
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/6934/cp6ss9.th.jpg (http://img297.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cp6ss9.jpg)

I made all of the buildings in the pic, they are all on google earth if you have downloaded the network link.

Lexcity

March 10th, 2008, 07:09 PM

That's awesome madtony, when do you think you'd have the facade on the building in your model?

madtony8k

March 10th, 2008, 08:41 PM

I'll probably start from scratch to make a more detailed model. I haven't used google sketchup in a while, i'm a little rusty. I still struggle with curved objects. :)

madtony8k

March 12th, 2008, 05:47 AM

Lexcity, since you requested it...

The render the newspaper was trying to attempt..
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/6960/papershotek2.jpg

Big Blue Brother.. I even modeled some trees :)
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/3228/bigbluebrotherif5.jpg
It's a very green building.

Lexington has a very bold skyline.
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/4454/facingthemvf1.jpg

Over downtown..
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/7378/overtownil8.jpg

Between the towers..
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/3816/hyattviewyp2.jpg

The new main street..
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/5189/newmainxa3.jpg

A good mix of old and new..
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/8397/oldandnewog9.jpg

All available in google earth.

superflymike

March 13th, 2008, 04:10 AM

nice job looks better than mine

madtony8k

March 13th, 2008, 05:48 PM

Nah, i used textures to add detail instead of geometry. That makes it more suited for google earth. Are you going to put yours on the 3d Warehouse too?

btw.. your diagrams helped a lot for modeling the other buildings. they were a quick way to get the building heights, thanks :)

seicer

March 14th, 2008, 05:18 AM

Nice work!

But ugly as sin boxes along Vine. I don't see it yet, but there is a new structure at Vine and Mill that's like four stories and VERY cheaply built. It appeared they were constructing it out of matchsticks, and to make it worse, they had prefabricated sections of exterior wall lifted into place.

I need to get a photo of this.

TheDame

March 14th, 2008, 05:38 AM

Did you see the "Now Hiring Architect" banner they had on the front of that building half-way through its construction? I REALLY wish I had taken a picture!

madtony8k

March 14th, 2008, 03:35 PM

Are you talking about that crappy white building between kincaide tower and the little gold looking building? Ya, that will be an easy one to model.

superflymike

March 14th, 2008, 04:21 PM

Ian604

March 14th, 2008, 09:00 PM

Did you see the "Now Hiring Architect" banner they had on the front of that building half-way through its construction? I REALLY wish I had taken a picture!

I have a picture of that somewhere. It was hillarious.

seicer

March 14th, 2008, 10:39 PM

Oh please do post (in the general Lexington thread). I want a good laugh and to share with some of my co-workers :D

Ian604

March 15th, 2008, 01:26 AM

I'll try to dig it up.

Ian604

March 15th, 2008, 01:28 AM

Could one of the mods change the title of the thread to include the official height of the tower. It's 406 feet.

Ian604

March 15th, 2008, 03:11 AM

Oh please do post (in the general Lexington thread). I want a good laugh and to share with some of my co-workers :D

Looks like i never saved it to photobucket. I deleted a whole lot of pictures a while back and it must have been among them. Sorry.

The Real

March 15th, 2008, 04:46 PM

Looks like i never saved it to photobucket. I deleted a whole lot of pictures a while back and it must have been among them. Sorry.

I have it, but I have no clue how to post pics. If anyone PM's me his email, I'll pass it along.

madtony8k

March 16th, 2008, 11:36 PM

Ian604, try messaging a mod, it worked for me for another thread.

TheDame

March 18th, 2008, 07:32 AM

KERNEL EDITORIAL: Public input may be too little too late for downtown hotel

When prominent Lexingtonians began talking about how to ensure that the 2010 World Equestrian Games leave a "legacy," most wouldn't have thought they meant destroying a vital part of local culture.

But that's precisely what's going to happen if the plans announced earlier this month to raze downtown's Rosenberg Block - home to The Dame, Mia's and Buster's, all frequent stops for UK students - are approved to build a 40-story hotel, reported in a March 5 Kernel article.

The destruction of the block would put a damper on local culture, especially the music scene. The Dame is essentially the only stop in Lexington for larger touring bands; without it, the town's thin slate of live entertainment options will become even slimmer.

And the trade off for this cultural damage that will last years: the city will be rewarded with a hotel that will be used for two weeks in 2010. (Maybe the city can ease pain and frustration by broadcasting concerts over the big screen planned for the skyscraper's side facing Phoenix Park.)

Of course, the hotel isn't intended for just two weeks' use - the hope is that the equestrian games will generate enough enthusiasm about Lexington that interest in tourism, and hence the need for downtown hotel rooms, will rise.

But who will want to stay downtown when there are few entertainment options and the only nightlife district is no more? If Lexington lets large-scale development replace the locales that make the city distinctive, tourists will find their stays dull and the locals will lose out more than anyone.

The problems with the proposed development go beyond the plan itself, the process that led to it was flawed.

While rumors flew about the Rosenberg Block's destruction for months before the plan was unveiled, developers and local officials kept mum. Instead of being shaped through public discussion and dialogue, the plan was essentially dumped on the public at a March 4 meeting.

There will be a public hearing in April before the city council takes a final vote on the development proposal, said Harold Tate, president and executive director of the Lexington Downtown Development Authority, in the March 5 Kernel story.

But there is a great deal of time pressure, with developers hoping to start construction in August and, of course, finish before the equestrian games start in September 2010.

If the plan had been meaningfully shaped by community input from the start, perhaps Lexington would not be facing the hollowing of its cultural core for short-term economic gain.

Future developments that would have such a large effect should not follow the pattern of secrecy, then rumors, then unveiling. They should be collaborative efforts from the start, so issues of interest to the community - not just the developers - can be aired out while there is still time to deliberate.

The public hearing next month may be the last chance for advocates of a healthy local culture to make their voices heard.

It is a shame that it will also be their first chance.

madtony8k

March 18th, 2008, 05:01 PM

I guess there is a threat to any small structure, historic or new, that is in a downtown area. Cities grow. Lexington hasn't had this potential for development downtown in a while, so when there was a chance, it was taken.

Downtown culture will be hit pretty hard by this... but if you think about it, the downtown plan calls for defining districts in and around downtown. Some concepts of the plans show urban shops and things. I am sure that this will generate a night life in some of these areas, and maybe another spot for the dame to relocate. But.. it would take a long time. :(

I really do think Lexington is making a big gamble with this. And a sacrifice. It seems like there are other places a similar tower could be built, but the same block would still wouldn't be safe from redevelopment.

cartomanlex

March 18th, 2008, 06:53 PM

I sympathize with the Dame, and I understand where the student body is coming from, but I have seen at least three phases of "student entertainment" areas over the years. There has always been a latest "happening place". Each time the leading place went out of business, there was a great wailing and bemoaning another "failure of the system". Each time, someone has stepped in to fill the supposed void and life has continued.

What I see here is the short-sightedness of youth learning the lesson of: Capitalism Works. This is the same lesson learned by two brothers who came out of Eastern Kentucky, to the University of Kentucky, to be taught that they could make a difference, and set about to do so. What I wonder is , what difference will these students make in/to the future.

TheDame

March 18th, 2008, 07:25 PM

TheDame

March 18th, 2008, 07:28 PM

Are we not capitalists? The Dame was opened by a partnership from Atlanta; Seeking a city to open a music venue, they looked at 16 different cities and chose Lexington.

Where did these two brothers you speak of learn how to contribute to the insolvency of life insurance companies? Can I go to UK for that?

seicer

March 18th, 2008, 07:46 PM

Capitalism doesn't always work out for the best. What are we proposing here? A four-star hotel in a city where we can't even fill up the Griffin Gate on most evenings to a reasonable occupancy rate, to be complimented with yet another four-star hotel at the Horse Park? Condominiums in a market that has all but gone south, where we can't even fully pre-sell Main and Rose, Mark Lofts, and Kimball House Square? And retail when we couldn't even keep the Festival Market and Victorian Square Shoppes filled?

Oh yeah, you can go to UK and get a degree. How fancy is that? Anyone with time and money and resources can do that. But a degree doesn't buy imagination, inspiration, creativity or the know-how to keep a district vibrant. The Dame has shown that it can do a lot with virtually very little to no support from the city or developers. It's living in a building that's all but been neglected for ten years. It's facilities are smaller than what it should be. It has little pedestrian life around it, sans Buster's and Mia's.

Want more? Try walking through Short North in Columbus. You'll find the North Market, hundreds of small shops, boutiques, restaurants, cafes, entertainment venues and residential units that are all unique, most non-chain establishments. In buildings that are both historic and beautiful, modest in size and pedestrian friendly. Art districts flourish with visitors. But smack-dab in the middle of this is the South Campus Gateway, constructed by some developers who received money from OSU, which has numerous retail vacancies including a defunct grocery store, and units that lease for 20 to 30% higher than surrounding properties. Yeah, it may look fancy, and the developers may have had college degrees, but that doesn't mean they can build onto something that will work.

College degree does not equal success. As the Webb Cos. have shown...

Cashville

March 18th, 2008, 10:24 PM

g-man430

March 18th, 2008, 10:38 PM

Just tear down the eyesores and build it I say. :rock: :D TheDame can move to the suburbs like everything else.

starbuc jupiter

March 18th, 2008, 11:47 PM

It is a nice looking building and it is just the right kind of development theat can spur other quality projects to happen nearby. It adds to the skyline without overpowering it and it is a destination all on its own.

As for the big equestrian event in 2010, take a lesson from Atlanta '96. Investing in things that have no purpose afterward is very dangerous, entertain your guests well and invest in quality. The crowd that will be visiting is a well traveled group and they are not the average tourist. They are there for the events and everything else is secondary.

cartomanlex

March 19th, 2008, 01:02 AM

This isn't entirely about "student entertainment". Since only ages 21+ can enter The Dame, students aren't really much of an issue.

We're talking about the 21 - 35 demographic. Exactly the young professionals that we can barely keep in Lexington as it is. I doubt these people are going to see any benefits from a luxury hotel they can't afford, condos they can't afford, office space that will probably end up being as vacant as all the other office buildings downtown, a chain restaurant that they can't afford, and retail that doesn't have much of a chance based on the previous Webb offerings.

I've heard talk of many leaving Lexington once this deal is finalized. I don't blame them.

If you are not about the student set then why is the student newspaper all upset about the loss of the Dame? Why did the investors place themselves between UK and Transy? Are these young professionals trying to hold on to their youth by partying with the same music as the student crowd, only away from them? And, if all these young professionals are so gung ho to leave Lexington, then why are we still growing in that demographic? We are closing in on 300K in population in Lexington alone and we are not a retirement center.

I've seen this all before, the young people come to school, stay to work and retire elsewhere. I have two nieces and one nephew who have left after college to work other places(big cities), fell in love and came home to get married and have kids. My brother left for a career in the service, then came home after he retired. We are still gaining population at a fairly good pace.

seicer

March 19th, 2008, 01:45 AM

From Nougat --

This blog is for events that we received after our monthly deadline, and so missed being on our calendar. We will add them as we receive them.

Save Downtown Lexington is VIDEO TAPING TESTIMONIES,
TUESDAY MARCH 18TH 8AM THROUGH 12PM, ON THE SECOND
FLOOR OF THE DOWNTOWN PUBLIC LIBRARY- LOOKING OVER THE
BLOCK IN QUESTION.

WE WILL ALSO VIDEO TAPE TESTIMONIES, FRIDAY MARCH 21ST
8AM THROUGH 5PM, ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE DOWNTOWN
PUBLIC LIBRARY-LOOKING OVER THE BLOCK IN QUESTION.

We are looking for people to share their memories and
stories of the businesses and the buildings on the
block. We are not asking people to talk about the
issues facing the block, but only to tell their
stories and interactions.

Refreshments will be provided.

Everybody with a story to tell will be filmed.

We encourage you to pass this information on to
anybody with a story.

The goal of these testimonies will be to add words to
the bricks.

These testimonies will be screened at an event called
Wake Up Lexington: Help Save Our Block, March 29
Saturday at 1030 AM at the Kentucky Theater.

Please Participate LEXINGTON needs your help, and
bring your friends.

For any questions please contact Griffin VanMeter at
ale8forme@gmail.com or 859.243.0000

The Webb Companies have also dedicated a phone like to
receiving calls commenting on its proposed
development. We do not know if The Webb Cos. will
share with the community the comments it receives. But
we do believe that it is important that we call this
line and politely express our concerns. We encourage
you to call this number and express your opposition to
the development currently on the table and your
support for an alternative project that marries great
design with the preservation of the entertainment
district and the historically and architecturally
significant buildings on this block.

You can reach the Webb Hotline at (859) 253-0000.

TheDame

March 19th, 2008, 02:14 AM

TheDame

March 19th, 2008, 02:33 AM

If you are not about the student set then why is the student newspaper all upset about the loss of the Dame? Why did the investors place themselves between UK and Transy? Are these young professionals trying to hold on to their youth by partying with the same music as the student crowd, only away from them? And, if all these young professionals are so gung ho to leave Lexington, then why are we still growing in that demographic? We are closing in on 300K in population in Lexington alone and we are not a retirement center.

I've seen this all before, the young people come to school, stay to work and retire elsewhere. I have two nieces and one nephew who have left after college to work other places(big cities), fell in love and came home to get married and have kids. My brother left for a career in the service, then came home after he retired. We are still gaining population at a fairly good pace.

"If you are not about the student set then why is the student newspaper all upset about the loss of the Dame?"

-We want student support, of course. I simply stated that the majority of students can't enter The Dame. You are trying to make it seem as though only college students patronize The Dame, and I'm countering you. Why would students NOT be upset about the loss of The Dame?

"Why did the investors place themselves between UK and Transy?"

-Because they are intelligent investors? The center of a city is a pretty obvious place to put a business that relies on customers physically walking into the property.

"Are these young professionals trying to hold on to their youth by partying with the same music as the student crowd, only away from them?"

-I don't know about you, but I don't think people in the 21 - 35 year old bracket are concerned about holding on to their youth. Personally, I consider 21 - 35 year olds as young individuals, and I am one of them.

Obviously, you aren't familiar with the music we bring to The Dame. We program bands for everyone, not just students. Maybe you've heard of The Zombies (sixties band, "Time of the Season", "Tell Her No"), X (first album in 1978), Rickie Lee Jones ("Chuck E's In Love"), Tom Tom Club (1/2 of Talking Heads, "Genius of Love"), Wanda Jackson (dated Elvis Presley, first singles in 1956), The Wailers (perhaps you've heard of Bob Marley? This is his band. Formed in 1965 or so), Blue Cheer (60's band, "Summertime Blues"), Hasil Adkins (rockabilly pioneer, first singles in 1950's), Leon Russell (60's and 70's musician), Poco ("Crazy Love"), Lee Rocker (bass player for The Stray Cats), Billy Joe Shaver, John Hammond, Sam Bush (of New Grass Revival. First album in 1971), Glenn Tilbrook of Squeeze ("Tempted"), Bernie Worrell (from Parliament Funkadelic), Goose Creek Symphony (started in 1970), Tommy Ramone (original drummer for The Ramones), Chip Taylor (wrote "Wild Thing" and "Angel of the Morning"), Johnny Cash's Tennessee Three (what's left of Johnny's band), Pete Best (original drummer for The Beatles), Burrito Deluxe (members of the Flying Burrito Brothers and featuring Garth Hudson from The Band). Get the point?

"And, if all these young professionals are so gung ho to leave Lexington, then why are we still growing in that demographic?"

-Because Lexington has been going in the right direction for the past five years. This development is a huge step backwards.

"We are closing in on 300K in population in Lexington alone and we are not a retirement center."

-Obviously.

g-man430

March 19th, 2008, 02:46 AM

^^Don't you just hate NIMBY'S? ;)

seicer

March 19th, 2008, 06:03 PM

Let's add in here the low occupancy rate of the Griffin Gate, a luxury hotel, and the fact that a private developer wants to build a four-star luxury hotel at the Kentucky Horse Park (partially with state funds), and that we can't even fully sell out condominium/loft units at our existing developments!

Too many dollar signs are lodged in developers' heads (http://www.kentucky.com/139/story/345193.html)
Proposal for huge hotel is driven by dollar signs, not sense
By Merlene Davis, Herald-Leader columnist, March 13, 2008

It seems we have become dazzled by the proposed number of folks coming to our area during September and October 2010 for the Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games, and that is leading to greed that folks seem unwilling or unable to control.

The estimate is about a half-million people flocking to the Bluegrass from more than 60 nations, spending at least $150 million, according to estimates on the WEG Web site.

Of course, the visitors will need somewhere to stay, but is a new downtown luxury mega-hotel the answer?

CentrePointe, the $250 million, 40-story skyscraper, proposed for downtown Lexington, seems a bit too much for Lexington.

The project will feature a 243-room, four-star hotel, plus 77 condominiums and 26,000 square feet of retail space, while engulfing the whole block bounded by Main, Upper and Vine streets and North Limestone.

Someone please tell me why we need all that.

There are only a few times each year, such as the Kentucky Derby or Keeneland meets, or maybe even University of Kentucky football homecoming or the boys Sweet Sixteen basketball tournament, that Lexington is swamped with enough visitors to warrant more hotel rooms downtown than we already have.

And when that happens in the future, couldn't we just send folks out to the proposed 267-room hotel at the Kentucky Horse Park?

The construction of both hotels appears to be targeted at the influx of that estimated half-million folks attending the equestrian games.

But after those folks leave, after they have stayed as long as 16 days in the Bluegrass, what then?

The 77 condos presumably will be bought by 77 very rich people despite the slowed economy.

But even with the creation of 1,100 new parking spots to squelch the ”nowhere-to-park“ arguments that shoppers might present, what retail stores could CentrePointe offer that would entice the average Lexing*tonian from the suburbs to shop downtown?

Come on, people. Let's slow down a bit on this one.

I'm all for a luxury four-star hotel in the middle of downtown Lexington. This city has always considered itself highfalutin because of the thoroughbred industry. A luxury hotel would be in keeping with that image.

I'm just not in favor of one that big and dominating that might sit nearly empty six months out of the year.

We have gone out of our way to make downtown Lexington appear warm and welcoming despite the blue-blood leanings. Successfully, I might add.

We have some of the most beautiful *hanging floral displays throughout the *summer, coupled with lush potted arrangements all along downtown streets.

We have the quaint lampposts that elicit warm and fuzzy notions of bygone days, even though several have burned-out bulbs.

A towering building of glass and steel doesn't add much ambience to that picture.

But then, I don't own it and probably won't benefit that much from any taxes it might generate. I don't look at downtown Lexington with dollar signs in my eyes.

Residents of Lexington need to figure out who we are before we allow a building to define us, especially a building that will be built with amazing speed just to cash in on visitors who might visit only once.

If the plans were scaled back to allow Lexington to retain some semblance of its charm, more people might embrace the CentrePointe project.

What's wrong with 25 stories, 35 condos, 120 rooms, half the parking and only a few stores and restaurants?

Wouldn't that fit in with the landscape we have now?

The developers would still make money and residents would still have time to adjust to the changing downtown profile.

Let's get a grip.

City officials should mimic the tortoise's slow and steady pace instead of the hare's speed on this one.

TheDame

March 19th, 2008, 07:12 PM

Lexington Herald-Leader Letters to the Editor - 3/19/2008

LEXINGTON TOO EAGER TO DESTROY ITS UNIQUENESS

Since moving to Lexington in 1977, I've been continually impressed by two Central Kentucky characteristics: pride in the things that make the Bluegrass special, and the seeming indifference to the destruction of those things.

Yes, it's good to improve Lexington's downtown. However, do we really want to replace thriving local businesses and historic architecture with a generic, impersonal glass tower containing a chain hotel?

Remember that CentrePointe is brought to you by the same company that razed historic buildings on Main Street to bring us the failed Festival Market in the 1980s.

We now have a Downtown Master Plan, which was created to prevent more Festival Market mistakes and, instead, promote vibrant and pedestrian-friendly urban infill around historic structures, badly needed in these times of economic downturn to keep people downtown. Although this plan is a guideline, not a law, it should be followed.

Soon the CentrePointe developers will be asking for funding in the form of tax increment financing, which will keep money out of our local government coffers.

However, since most of the existing buildings on this block are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and, therefore, could receive state and federal historic preservation tax credits for rehabilitation, Lexingtonians should insist that we save money and promote downtown by building on -- not building over -- what we already have.

Alice Wasielewski
Lexington

KEEP MUSIC VENUE

So we, the taxpayers, are supposed to support The Webb Cos.' evil plan to erect -- and boy do I mean erect -- a useless, self-serving high-rise?

Don't we get a vote in this, as we did when LexTran needed more tax money? And why put this on a block where active and vital businesses are thriving? Why not knock down Lexington Mall and build it there?

Country music artist Kenny Chesney was second only to The Police in box office concert sales last year, yet he picked The Dame as one of the venues on his warmup club tour. If an act of that commercial significance wants to play at this club, then it must be doing something right.

I have met many legendary acts in the past few years, and I didn't have to travel outside Lexington to see them. Why give my money to businesses in Louisville and Cincinnati?

We all know that as soon as the 2010 Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games end, the hotel will sit vacant, and the shops will end up like Festival Market, which was another great idea from the Webbs.

Why help the Webbs line their pockets? We should escort them out of town.

Kevin Martinez
Lexington

USE EXISTING BUILDINGS

As a Lexingtonian, I have quietly watched the beauty of downtown wrecked, razed and bulldozed over the years.

I still remember shopping at Stewart's, Lowenthal's, Embry's, Wenniker's, Wolf Wile, Hymson's and Town and Country. I remember lunching in the Phoenix Hotel dining room or sitting at the counter of Woolworth's with my grandmother on Saturday afternoons. There were people on the streets visiting and shopping.

I also remember the urban blight during the 1980s and how downtown dried up thanks, in part, to The Webb Cos. and its debacles.

I strongly encourage the city to slow down and think about the block known as Morton's Row that houses The Dame. I would like to see the CentrePointe project scale back and incorporate the historically significant buildings there.

Leslie Beatty

Lexington

gt7834a

March 19th, 2008, 07:44 PM

What ever Merlene Davis says I generally think the exact opposite;) Why would we want to send potential tourists out to the horse park when we can have them downtown? Just because one is a bad idea(a 4 star in the horse park) doesn't mean the other is a bad idea. Even the manager of the Griffin Gate said that this hotel would not be competing with the GG and that he thought it was a good idea.
As the to the office, you obviously have not looked around downtown for office. There are a lot of for rent signs but there is almost no Class A office space available and what little there is is in the 1000-2000 SF and less range. If you have a large firm there is no where to go. Out of all of it I have the most faith in the office portion.

People crack me up.'why not knock down Lexington Mall and build it there' Well because the owners won't sell it and you can't build more than 2 stories in the B-1 zone, but other than that a great idea! It is really hard to get downtown property of any size. People just do not want to sell it plus there is not nearly as much of it as people like to think. The only major ones are around Rupp to the South and West and the city has plans for those. Where else is there? There are a couple of decent sized lots on Short, neither are huge. One is owned by a trust that won't and doesn't need to sell and the other is owned by Lollis who tries to tear down everything he ever buys and won't sell anything. I tried to buy both of them and could not even get a price and both said they were not interested in selling. After that there is? I don't know of anything else. The transit center is suppose to happen but keeps getting held up and frankly other than that I don't know of anthing that is bigger than 1/5 of an acre.

I understand peoples concern but don't act like there are bunch of other places and that the developers are just trying to ruin the Dame.

seicer

March 19th, 2008, 07:52 PM

I look at the Horse Park as another state park. Tourism. I'm against the four-star hotel at the Horse Park but I'm open for one in the downtown, and with the cost escalations at the Horse Park hotel proposal, it may not even pass. A hotel at the Horse Park would compete directly with the Griffin Gate -- two suburban/rural hotels catering to the same clientèle. A downtown hotel caters to a totally different crowd.

As for the Lexington Mall property, that is just one mess by Saul (http://abandonedonline.net/index.php?catid=13).

Lollis... what properties does he own specifically?

gt7834a

March 19th, 2008, 08:09 PM

He owns the old Herald Leader site on Short and Market Street. It is odd shaped and goes back to Church and over to Upper behind those office buildings. He also owns the corner next to Bang on Limestone and Short. He tried to tear down the building that the new Irish pub is going into but thankfully the city would not let him. He owns several other buildings downtown also. I was kind of kidding about him tearing everything down, but he is certainly not a historic preservationist.
I tried to buy Lexington Mall also and could not even get a returned call. Those people are nuts. That is a super prime piece of land that they just flat refuse to do anything with for some reason. I do not understand it at all. It is smaller but it should be a better mall than Fayette since it is so close to the weathy part of town. That failed because for some reason they wanted it to fail. Strangest thing I have ever seen.

I think that the Horse Park and Griffin Gate will definitely compete for customers. I just don't see the need for a 4 start hotel at the Horse Park. That is not the kind of people that are going to want to stay way out there. You might be able to make a small luxury spa/Inn type place work with 20-30 rooms but there is no way there are 150+ people that can/will pay $200 a night to stay in the Horse Park. I do think those people will want to stay downtown and go to restraurants, events at Rupp, conventions, do business, etc. Much bigger clientel group downtown than in the middle of nowhere.

I hope the Dame can stay downtown but I think people are over stating things a bit to say that if you get rid of this block you are getting rid of all the downtown entertainment. The Dame is certainly a draw but there will still be a bunch of bars dowtown and several with live music. Not nearly the size nor the quality of bands but I think everyone is speaking with a bit of hyperboli. Busters and Mia's can easily be moved, the Dame is the tough one. I just don't know of anything in the immediate area that is big enough.

seicer

March 19th, 2008, 08:27 PM

Ah. That a$$hole. I remembered hearing about his whines about the Irish Pub location (now I know where it's going to be at!). If I recall, his rants went about this: "I own the location, and it's in severe disrepair." (Due to his lack of upkeep and maintenance.) "Since I own it, I want to demolish it." Sorry, doesn't work that way, even if you own it. Thankfully, he wasn't allowed to go forward with his plans.

What are the plans for The Bang? I know that they were discussing a new facade for the building, but no work has started.

gt7834a

March 19th, 2008, 10:07 PM

I am afraid they may think they have already put a new facade on it;) They did a little bit of work on it about a year ago. I hope they do something, it is quite the eye sore currently.

Dale

March 19th, 2008, 10:18 PM

I've never seen the likes of SSC forumers campaigning against a skyscraper. Granted, it's your city.

seicer

March 19th, 2008, 10:40 PM

cartomanlex

March 20th, 2008, 12:09 AM

:)It's a hot button issue. What's at stake is the loss of 100-year-old structures, a wildly popular entertainment venue, and two hometown establishments. We've already seen the loss of two establishments already from the block over the past two months. Some do not trust the Webb Cos. Some do not trust the Rosenberg's who own the block. Others are just distrustful of developers in general. Many do not want to see 1/3 of Phoenix Park go. Everyone want to see infill go in on that block, but after seeing massive tear-downs from the 1960s to the 1990s, many are resentful against anything that is going to substantially change the character of the downtown.

The character of downtown needs to change substantially. The downtown area needs to have more residential. The delays in the Blackhorse project, the Mark Acre project, Shelburne Plaza project, The Transit Center project, the 500's on Main project, the unnamed million dollar condos at 2nd and Mill St. only exacerbate the need for substantial change.

You seem to be in favor of all these other projects but rail incessantly about CenterPointe and the loss of the Dame. It confuses me.

TheDame

March 20th, 2008, 12:39 AM

The character of downtown needs to change substantially. The downtown area needs to have more residential. The delays in the Blackhorse project, the Mark Acre project, Shelburne Plaza project, The Transit Center project, the 500's on Main project, the unnamed million dollar condos at 2nd and Mill St. only exacerbate the need for substantial change.

You seem to be in favor of all these other projects but rail incessantly about CenterPointe and the loss of the Dame. It confuses me.

I'm in favor of all the other projects as well. The Dame/Rosenberg/Woolworth block in question is a unique situation and many feel that we should not hastily jump into something that can never be reversed. There are literally thousands of people in Lexington that feel the same way.

seicer

March 20th, 2008, 01:11 AM

Why am I against Centrepoint cartomanlex? Well, if you would read my general complaints that I've repeated 100x previously, I wouldn't have the need to keep repeating myself. I'm all for downtown development, but in good taste. Just because I support 500's on the Main, Main and Rose, etc., doesn't mean that I must support Centrepoint on the basis that all downtown growth is good. I supported Main and Rose, for instance, because it was an appropriately scaled development (although I would have liked to see the original 7 story structure there) that added a nice streetscape (no mall) on what was a barren surface lot. Mark Lofts I was indifferent about, and still am, as it replaced what was once a vibrant and rather nice looking church. And so forth.

Thanks for the additional mischaracterizations again. I'm not going to explain why I dislike Centrepointe in relation to other development projects. It's comparing apples to oranges.

Now can we get off of your continual rants against those who ... you know, dislike Centrepointe for whatever reason? You do not need to question or persist every user who pops in here with an opposing opinion.

TheDame

March 20th, 2008, 01:56 AM

I might also add that I didn't just pop up on this board. I've been stating my opinion about this and other issues on this forum since 2006.

seicer

March 20th, 2008, 02:15 AM

We need more of you :)

cartomanlex

March 20th, 2008, 03:11 AM

Merriam-Webster's Open Dictionary.
rant intransitive verb 1 : to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner 2 : to scold vehemently

Are my "rants" in favor of the project any worse than your "rants" in opposition?

My desire to see Lexington improve has not wavered in the last 35 years of public service and I have not been disappointed. I don't want to say lets have improvement everywhere but here, or redevelopment can only happen in this area but not there, or these can go but these have to stay as they are. We have to balance things and not be selective just because a set number of people find that it doesn't fit their current view of life. I tell you , I have been on both sides of these issues in the past. What was a supposed loss turned out to be a tremendous gain for all.

I do read your complaints and your positive comments about all the various projects in Lexington. (also your postings about Kentucky, West Virginia and other relevant developments) I find your interests varied and comments are usually insightful. I find some of your historical "facts" to be a little lacking, but then I have a ton of documents at my disposal that you may not.

madtony8k

March 20th, 2008, 05:43 PM

seicer

March 20th, 2008, 06:24 PM

[QUOTE=cartomanlex;19135851I find some of your historical "facts" to be a little lacking, but then I have a ton of documents at my disposal that you may not.[/QUOTE]

I only have access to the public library system, Herald-Leader archives, open records... which I have taken advantage of in my writeups to UrbanUp, Abandoned, etc. If you have more to share, it would be much appreciated. What other sources do you claim?

Ian604

March 21st, 2008, 04:19 AM

A Downtown For Us
By Susan Baniak and Tom Martin
www.bizlex.com

March 22, 2008
Here are some questions for anyone who cares what happens next to the center of our city:

First, a deceptively simple question that, when posed and answered, illuminates the variety of competing visions in our community: what exactly do you want downtown Lexington to become?

Are those in positions to bring about real change imagining a downtown scene that promotes sociability, inviting residents of greater Lexington to feel alive and connected?

What if we could apply a “bustle-meter” to all of our many downtown initiatives and investments and gauge how much real human energy these ideas would actually contribute to our urban core?

We have heard the laments in recent months of downtown’s difficulty in attracting and sustaining retail. Over the years, we have looked for the answer in logistical considerations, such as parking perceptions and traffic flow. These may be contributing factors, but in reality, by focusing our attention on these logistics, we are trying to find better ways to channel the human energy that simply isn’t there at this point, because we, like so many communities, have slowly siphoned it from our downtown over the years.

What if we were to place higher values on human experience and satisfaction as measures of the virtues of any project that would define the character of downtown?

Creating a successful downtown is not about constructing buildings. It’s about how people will use them. People create energy. People create economic development. People create thriving downtowns. People of all ages and lifestyles, who work and shop downtown during the day, and return for dining and entertainment at night. People who venture downtown, not necessarily to attend a specific concert or event, but simply because they enjoy being part of it, they like the entire downtown atmosphere, and they want the whole experience. When was the last time we could say that about our downtown?

You can’t create that kind of environment block by block or building by building, and the city council is wise to take its time in considering the long-term ramifications of the CentrePointe proposal. The concerns expressed by councilmembers like Dick DeCamp regarding the CentrePointe project were refreshing to hear. No downtown development, no matter its scale or potential, is an island, because the greatest attraction of any successful downtown is its human energy, and that should not be concentrated in a single block or a building. It cannot be built on a single business or entertainment venue. From Rupp Arena to the west to Main & Rose to the east, our downtown has incredible potential to become our touchstone — a place where we could have some coffee at a sidewalk cafe on one of our supremely gorgeous spring afternoons and discuss these very issues as we greet friends and acquaintances passing by on their way to their own chance encounters. In an age when consumers can fill virtually every material need online without leaving the isolated comfort of their homes, we're losing touch with the value of spending time with each other. What if we were to concentrate on the real advantages of a vibrant downtown, and the genuine amenities that cannot be provided by a virtual world — namely, the human interaction. The live experience. The sense of adventure. That sense of belonging in a community of people?

In regard to what’s best for our downtown, there is no shortage of ideas. We have compiled stacks of plans and concepts and benchmark studies and best practices. We have gone back and forth and back again, debated and argued and thrown up our hands and come back to the table to revisit the issue, on concepts such as two-way streets and closing Vine Street at Triangle Park. As shown by the proposed CentrePointe project and other downtown developments, we also have people willing to make the investment.

What we haven’t had downtown, however, is the people. As a city, we have always been quick to highlight the advantages of our landscape and our agrarian heritage. We have, in effect, diverted our attention, and that of our visitors, away from our city core. And yet there is no reason why we can’t have both a beautiful natural environment and a vibrant downtown. In fact, because of the forethought shown in the establishment of our urban services boundary, we are one of few cities with a real opportunity to achieve an enviable balance. And yet, the majority of Lexingtonians today do an excellent job of conducting their lives around our city core and not in it. And as we consider the opportunity presented to us by CentrePointe, that should be a primary concern of both our elected officials and citizens: What will bring the human energy back downtown?

At the same time, we must be careful not to limit our possibilities, and not to close our minds to ambitious ideas for fear of losing what limited assets exist already. Solid concepts will endure downtown, as long as they can continue to feed that human interest and energy. Once again, the human energy is the commodity that we must evaluate,and in doing so, determine what physical structures should be built, altered or maintained to best suit it. For too long, however, we have expected our downtown businesses not simply to contribute to that energy, but to generate it almost entirely by themselves.

We believe that in today’s atmosphere of troubling, battering economic news, community is the real key to human satisfaction. And if we as a community want our own authentic human energy in our city’s core, we have to contribute to it, invest ourselves in it and become a part of it.

Certainly we are a welcoming community to those who do not call Lexington home but who visit, intermingle socially and contribute to our local economy. But shouldn’t our priority be the vision that first and best serves the people who are committed to the life of this city by virtue of their presence — that is, the residents of Lexington, Kentucky?

The CentrePointe project certainly is grand. But is it Lexington? As it was initially presented to the city council, we believe the answer is no. What is Lexington? What made our city attractive to so many of us who left our home state for the nation’s major metros only to eventually return? It’s the inviting, comfortable scale of this urban village of ours. That’s a precious balance that we dare never squander.

However, we believe there is still room to find a balance between CentrePointe’s ambitious vision and the more Lexington-friendly improvements that many in the community are now calling for. But whatever the future holds, the real destiny of our city’s core will be determined by our willingness to contribute ourselves and our presence to it. Whether it features an entertainment enclave or an exclusive hotel, a retail attraction or a condo community, a high-rise or historic monument, it will only thrive as our downtown if we make it a place where people want to be.

madtony8k

March 21st, 2008, 05:52 PM

A hotel won't add much to the "bustle meter" of downtown if there is nothing downtown to visit. Besides a few people that work in the offices and bball every now and then at rupp.. what else is there to do? I've seen a few bars and restaurants, and a chunk of those would be destroyed. There aren't many shops. I've been to KY theater and it's amazing. If this project is going to work, Lexington needs to up the "bustle meter" and get more people downtown.

Why is the city so suburban oriented? What brings everyone to Hamburg instead of downtown? It seems like we need some good shopping and some landmarks that will give people a reason to visit.

Ian604

March 21st, 2008, 06:59 PM

I dropped into Rite Aid at Main and Lime today and one of the employees that i see a lot down there told me their last day will be in mid April.

gt7834a

March 21st, 2008, 07:26 PM

There is a pretty good bustle downtown on a lot of days. When the weather is nice there are people everywhere. There are a bunch of bars and restaurants plus while not enough, there is some shopping. On most Friday and Sat. nights there are a ton of people in most every bar including Cheapside, Rosebud, Macarthy's, Hugo, Redmon's, The Dame, etc. I meet people that are in town and staying at the Hyatt or Radisson pretty often. They definitely add to the bustle. A hotel is actually one of the best ways to add people to downtown because they tend to walk around and look at stuff and look for places to eat, drink, etc. because they have nothing else to do.

I agree that more would be better and for a city our size we have a strangely small amount. If you go to a place like Ann Arbor, which is less than half the size of Lexington, you have more small shops, restuarants, bars etc. I don't know the answer unfortunatly but it has been true for 25+ years.

madtony8k

March 22nd, 2008, 11:20 PM

A hotel is actually one of the best ways to add people to downtown because they tend to walk around and look at stuff and look for places to eat, drink, etc. because they have nothing else to do.

I don't understand how a hotel will bring more people downtown if there is trouble to fill the hotels that already exist. I think more shops add people to downtown, and the hotel gives them an oppertunity to stay, but a hotel won't add more if there is not an incentive to visit.

Ian604

March 23rd, 2008, 12:39 AM

^^What adds more people to downtown is adding more housing.

People wont come downtown to shop when they can shop near their suburban homes, and (strange to hear myself say this) but that's how it should be. They wont drive downtown, search for parking, then walk three blocks to a store where they can get the same item near home. If we had better transit that might allow people to come downtown without the need for parking but we dont have a system that is presently competitive with the automobile.

When we add more housing the demand for retail will rise. As demand for retail rises it will be more attractive to live nearby boosting demand for more housing and so on. It's cyclical. But housing has to come first.

cartomanlex

March 23rd, 2008, 02:53 AM

Fact: Retail follows population.

History: Population left downtown > Retail followed population > Downtown declined.

Future?: Build hotel and condos > Bring population downtown > Retail follows population.

Alternate future?: Leave downtown the same > Downtown declines more.

Your Choice???

madtony8k

March 24th, 2008, 03:45 AM

Good points everyone. It is very cyclical. Residential boosts retail, retail boosts residential. So is mixed use a better decision than just residential? Maybe if the jobs created are filled by residents of the condos.

TheDame

March 24th, 2008, 03:56 AM

Posted on Sun, Mar. 23, 2008
Respect what young adults say about downtown
By Jacalyn Carfagno
HERALD-LEADER EDITORIAL WRITER

When I was a kid, no one asked me what I wanted for lunch or where we should go on vacation. We weren't given many choices. That was the way it was.

So, it was a bit of a surprise when it finally dawned on me that the inevitable result of raising my own child to think for herself and make choices was that I have to listen when she expresses an opinion.

This isn't a column about child-rearing. I'm far from an expert, and it's an overcrowded field. This is about realizing that the world has changed and that there's a younger generation that expects -- and deserves -- to be heard.

That lesson is being taught in Lexington now through the debate over the proposed mega-tower in the heart of downtown.

The block where The Webb Cos. is proposing a scorched-earth approach to building an architecturally uninspired $250 million, 40-story hotel tower with expensive condominiums and high-end ground floor retail is at the historic center of downtown Lexington, a block that's now home to the richest nightlife for young adults this city has enjoyed in years.

A generation ago, there would have been little public discussion. Whether they met at city hall or the Idle Hour Country Club or a box at Keeneland, the powers-that-were decided, and that's what got built.

That's the way it was for Donald and Dudley Webb as they remade downtown Lexington with the backing of the now-defunct Kentucky Central Life Insurance Co. and its founder, the late Garvice Kincaid.

"Everybody knew ... that suddenly we were in favor with Mr. Kincaid, and he would loan us anything we wanted," Donald Webb testified in a 1998 lawsuit stemming from the collapse of Kentucky Central.

It went beyond ready financing. When the Webbs were turned down for a project in the 1980s, a news story noted it was the first time the brothers ever lost a zoning battle. The decision was later reversed.

But that was then.

Today, the very group that every civic leader wants to attract -- well-educated, young, creative, tech-savvy people -- wants a say in what happens downtown.

They may wind up with dark-suited lawyers to plead their cases before the boards, commissions and councils that will decide the fate of this proposal. But the young people are going beyond that, into a realm that's unfamiliar to the Webbs and Mayor Jim Newberry and me.

For me at least, it's exciting.

Political blogger Joe Sonka has set up a Facebook site to critique the tower, share news about the opposition and exchange information. It now has more than 1,400 members.

Preserve Lexington is sending out daily e-mails about the proposal to more than 600 addresses. In the viral world of the Internet, people getting those communiques will forward them to more people, and so the conversation grows.

At the same time, Griffin VanMeter, a founder of a group called Creative Downtown, is collecting oral histories of the block on camera.

Clips of the memories will be shown at "Wake Up Lexington: An Event to Save Our Block," an event organized by Preserve Lexington that will be held at the Kentucky Theatre on Saturday. You can read all about it on Facebook or at preservelexington.org.

This is not a movement to stop all development on the block. It's not an in-your-face challenge to the power structure. It's a thoughtful, if occasionally irreverent, challenge to the proposal before us. They think we can do better.

It's exciting, but I'm scared. Not by the building. I'm too old to think my life will end if an unimaginative megalith rises on that block.

What scares me is that business as usual will prevail, that conversations somewhere off camera, among people who think they know better because they control power and capital will ignore the people who could shape our future.

It scares me that this huge, vibrant conversation in a new realm will be discounted because it's not the way we've done things before.

These talented, smart, engaged young people will shape the future somewhere. If they get locked out here, they'll go where they can be heard.

They expect to be heard, and they deserve to be heard.

Listen, Lexington.

seicer

March 24th, 2008, 05:56 AM

Someone posted this at LexRides. This is from the former Dean of UK's College of Architecture, Anthony Eardley.

A POSITION ON CENTREPOINTE

Perhaps we need reminding that the authors of the Centrepointe scheme have a truly dismal record of building on Main Street? It was the Webbs who erected the dreary, concrete-paneled bookends of the Radisson block (Vine Center), and who then indulged in a little whimsy across Main Street with the fatuous, Churchill Downsy Festival Market (now Triangle Center), the Webbs once again who gave us the Wildcat-hued glass of the thirty storey Big Blue tower (Lexington Fiancial Center), a building appropriate only to the urban wilderness of Dubai, whose plug-in, eight storey, concrete-paneled parking structure reduces to a displaced antiquity the delicate cast iron facade that flanks it at Main and Upper, and demeans the Old Court House Plaza across the street with its vacant-eyed want of civility. Given their penchant for centers and symmetrical planning, it would scarcely have been rocket science if, having determined to erect a symmetrical free-standing tower on the Financial Center site, they were to have aligned Big Blues north-south axis with that of the symmetrical Old Courthouse, and used the parking structure as a backdrop to a new plaza extending the space of the old. But their concerns evidently extend little farther than the building envelope, let alone the other side of the street. And their architects, facing no challenge from the public realm, have all too readily acquiesced to the clients prerogatives to get it done fast and keep the costs down, doing just enough to satisfy the building code and recovering what little profit remained from the cut-rate fee. For these developments, a plethora ofplaceless centers, the Webb Companies have earned little but our resentment and suspicion.

Now they want tabula rasa rights across an entire block and more, for what Mary McNeese, in her admirable March 11 letter to the Herald-Leader, has rightly summarized as an overpriced, out-of-scale, understudied and underwritten sequel. No doubt they have felt emboldened by the fact that the Museum Plaza project, Louisvilles sixty-two storey grotesquerie, is a recipient of TIF support, and that the Downtown Lexington Master Plan, the outcome of much community effort, sound, well-considered consultant advice, and over $400,000 in expenditure, (available on the web for all to see at <www.lexingtondda.com/DMP-doc.htm>), has yet to be adopted by the Urban County Council to inform the work of its Downtown Development Authority.

Though there is less detail in the Webb presentation than one would wish to see, indeed, far less than is required of a couple of senior students presenting a term-long comprehensive project, the mixed use behemoth that is now proposed, it seems to me, would serve the unrepentant greed and megalomania of its developers, and nothing more. Its 887,000 square foot program is so grossly overinflated that almost half the parking requirements it necessitatescould be accommodated only by resort to another plug-in, ten level parking annex, shoe-horned without a word of apology into Phoenix Park.

Its totally self-referential massing has three components. First, there is a four storey U shape that surrounds a 150-foot-square car court opening to Vine Street. This sets out 23,700 square feet of retail space, a coffee shop, and a couple of bars and restaurants on some notional ground plane that enables the architects to overlook the significant grade change between Main and Vine --- about seven feet, as I recall from student projects on this site. The three upper levels of the U contain hotel ballrooms, meeting facilities and a spa in the west wing, and office space in the east. This four storey component has the ostensible purpose of making the perimeter of the complex responsive to the scale of the surrounding streetscape, which it then so resolutely ignores in its myopic struggle to bring order to its interior spaces that its facades offer just the same dumb indifference and hostility to the city as we have all been obliged to endure in our daily encounters with existing Webb projects.

So, for instance, the canopied entries to the hotel and the condos on Main Street --- which Dudley Webb still regards as the principal points of access to the building despite his half acre of car court on Vine --- are furnished with a sweeping automobile lay-by that has been unflinchingly permitted to disrupt the continuity of the sidewalk and to create the most dangerous possible conditions for the hapless pedestrian. Further, this lay-by clearly presumes the future purpose of Main Street, not as an outdoor place for the use and enjoyment of people, but continuing in its present function as a mere conduit to funnel wheeled vehicles as quickly as possible from unidentified but more important locations somewhere in the suburban east to other anonymous but more important locations somewhere in the suburban west. This view is reinforced by the conspicuous absence of sidewalk entries to the retail spaces of the building, which would be entered instead from internal arcades accessed from just two points of entry, one at each corner of the block on Main Street, anti-urban devices calculated to siphon people off the sidewalk and drain the life out of the street. Those of us who actually live in the downtown have long contested this view of Main Street, and our view is clearly upheld in the Recommendations of the Downtown Master Plan, which shows a phased return to two-way of all the one-way streets in the downtown. But Dudley Webb and his suburbanite teams of architects adhere to their one-way inclinations, nevertheless.

Around the corner, on Upper Street --- another street that is presently one-way --- one would encounter a complete battery of conditions hostile to urban welfare. For a full 150 feet along the sidewalk there would be nothing but fire stairs, truck loading docks and a kitchen. Above this, the entire 240 foot length of the second and third storeys would be occupied solely by storage, service and mechanical spaces, shoved to the outer perimeter by the crude exigencies of the plan. A more effective set of disincentives to the recovery of a flourishing urban life on an Upper Street restored to two-way traffic can scarcely be imagined.

Indeed, everything that presently brings some semblance of vitality to the block is now under marching orders to go elsewhere, not just its arts and entertainment venues, which have managed to flourish in some of the slightly shabby, and now clearly inconvenient surviving buildings on the block, but even its slightly untidy and now inconvenient Saturday Farmers Market, which, to the great joy of the many who frequent it, has occupied this generous, sun-drenched section of Vine Street sidewalk for years --- all to be banished and left to fend for themselves, maybe somewhere in the downtown, maybe with Harold Tates assistance, maybe not, but certainly out of sight and hearing of Centrepointe. So why, one must ask, would these people want to build in the city when they find the stuff of urban life so distasteful?

Having thus leveled the block and sterilized its perimeter, the illusory U is then surmounted by a nine storey slab of hotel accommodation running along Main Street. These two components, the U and the slab, are cobbled together with layers of retardataire neo-classical trappings ---- not unlike the amateur displays that baffle the eye on the facades of the new courthouses --- but exhibit not the slightest grasp of Beaux Arts compositional discipline in either plan or elevation. One is obliged to ask, in consequence, whether this ungainly assembly owes its existence entirely to its bloated building program, or whether certain elements of the program, its 83,000 square feet of office space for example, have had to be drummed up and tacked on to the original punch list simply to fill out the volume demanded by the building�s symmetry of footprint and profile?

Finally, the thirteen storey mass along Main Street is violently split in two by the huge phallic thrust of the condo tower, rising from the base to a height of forty storeys above the sidewalk in a disgusting assertion of the developers ego, and in flagrant disregard of the fifteen storey limit that is recommended by the Downtown Master Plan. And though we have long become inured to the overbearing presence of the skyscraper on the city sidewalk, and have even learned to enjoy its spikes and bar graphs on the distant skyline, the offensiveness of the proposed display is not readily ignored, from either close to or far away. �Whether a deliberate part of its iconic agenda or just a calamitous by-product of the final massing, the building engenders the image --- made inescapable in the architects perspective --- of a cupped hand giving the finger to the city.

And they want TIF money for it! The colorful Yiddish term, chutzpah was once explained to me as embracing the kind of shameless audacity possessed by a thief who steals a hot dog from a curbside stand, but asks the proprietor to put mustard on it for him before he carries it off. This proposal completes my understanding of chutzpah.

Among the developers urgings that the project be approved without fuss or delay, so that it may start emerging from the ground by mid-August and be open for the World Equestrian Games in 2010, are pious assertions about the new jobs it will create and its LEED certification. We know very well that any new development will bring new jobs, some more attractive, some less, some more numerous, some less, which should not be a matter of central concern here unless, of course, your chief interest is TIF income. Not all of us may understand, however, that LEED certification does not signify some uniformly high standard of environmental efficiency in a building. There are several levels of LEED certification, and the lower ratings are actually much less distinguished than they sound. A Silver rating, for example, such as that earned by Robert Sterns Disneyland Federal Style proposal for the new UK Law quadrangle, might suggest an honorable second-place performance to most of us when, in fact, it represents only the fourth level of achievement on the LEED scale. Thus, LEED certification can amount to something substantial or something quite trivial.� The elements of the program and the sheer surface area of this proposal make it hard to imagine that it could achieve a rating higher than Silver, but who needs even the��highest LEED rated city block that is an unmitigated urban disaster?

The Urban County Council should not hesitate to reject the present proposal in toto. The Council needs, no matter how belatedly, to formally adopt the Downtown Master Plan, to inform the work of the Downtown Development Authority and to ensure the satisfaction of the standards outlined in the Plan by any new urban development enterprise, especially by a project seeking access to TIF resources. This should be reinforced by the establishment of an architectural review panel such as the one that has been in force in downtown Cincinnati for decades, to the satisfaction of both the citizen and the developer.

It might also enquire into the judgment and fealty of the Chairman and Director of the Downtown Development Authority, both of them architects who were heavily engaged in the preparation of the Plan, but who now, inexplicably, seem more like acolytes to the Webb proposal than representatives of the public interest. Having offered to give the proposal a mere �tweak or two, either to assuage their own consciences or mollify public opinion, they appear happy to actually endorse�this new and most monumental attack on our ravaged and still �fragile downtown. If their volte-face is triggered by fears of being seen to let a major development opportunity escape their grasp, they should be assured that only the impenetrably stupid --- and there are always some of those --- will persist in regarding this monstrous proposal as beneficial to the downtown. The people of Lexington deserve better than this from a $250,000,000 TIF project in the core of their city.�We have a Plan, a very good plan, for which they were the midwives. Let us embrace it and implement it.

Anthony Eardley.

gt7834a

March 24th, 2008, 08:36 PM

I am sure there are good points in that argument but it is so snootily and angrily written that it is hard to find. That may be the most, 'I know WAY better than anyone else what is best for Lexington and frankly everything else in the world' pieces I have ever encountered. A lot of what he says is probably true but I can't get to that part because his ego is blocking the way.

seicer

March 24th, 2008, 08:58 PM

Yeah, he does have a lot of great points. One part that I really agree upon is the "u-shaped" drive-in that has two access points; I would rather see this become a pedestrian circular, with tables, shade trees, and the like implemented instead. This could serve as outdoor seating for a restaurant or cafe.

I am also not a fan of the indoor arcade, which would really draw pedestrian activity from the streetscape. Stores are funneled inside and there will only be two access points -- IMO, I would like to see the stores open up to both the street and to an interior arcade.

I am assuming he has contacted the Webb for further details, in respect to what will be along Upper (nothing but loading bays and etc.), the indoor arcade, and more that was not published in the H-L.

"phallic thrust" :D

"the building engenders the image --- made inescapable in the architects perspective --- of a cupped hand giving the finger to the city." :D

gt7834a

March 24th, 2008, 11:07 PM

'Finally, the thirteen storey mass along Main Street is violently split in two by the huge phallic thrust of the condo tower, rising from the base to a height of forty storeys above the sidewalk in a disgusting assertion of the developers ego, and in flagrant disregard of the fifteen storey limit that is recommended by the Downtown Master Plan. And though we have long become inured to the overbearing presence of the skyscraper on the city sidewalk, and have even learned to enjoy its spikes and bar graphs on the distant skyline, the offensiveness of the proposed display is not readily ignored, from either close to or far away.'

In other words, he is against every skyscraper every built. I think this is the crux of his problem with it. I agree that we need to be very congnicent of the pedestrian and that blank walls and inward facing retail should be avoid to the greatest extent possible. I am not a huge fan of the idea of a large auto drive as it can be anti pedestrian. I strongly disagree that skyscrapers are the devil as he seems to think and I like when a downtown has some height to it, both from afar and up close. Also if our dowtown is going to grow, and at the same time we are going to attempt to save historic structures we are going to need density and that results in skyscrapers, or at least it should. There is no better place for this than right in the center of downtown. Every good planner has the center of the city as the most dense and then moving out, if we can only go 15 stories, which is a rediculously arbitrary height, we will never get the density that we need in downtown

cartomanlex

March 25th, 2008, 02:12 AM

"...rising from the base to a height of forty storeys above the sidewalk in a disgusting assertion of the developers ego, and in flagrant disregard of the fifteen storey limit that is recommended by the Downtown Master Plan. "

The fifteen story limit did not make it into the final draft of the DMP. THe DMP does not have to adopted by the UCG, nor does it have to be adopted by the Planning Commission (although the major objectives of it were).

The architect from SCB(I think it was Charlie Barnhart) said at the press conference and at the Council work session that, all the stores at ground level would have separate street entrances. In essence, learning from the mistakes of the past(Festival Market).

gt7834a

March 25th, 2008, 04:53 PM

The architect from SCB(I think it was Charlie Barnhart) said at the press conference and at the Council work session that, all the stores at ground level would have separate street entrances. In essence, learning from the mistakes of the past(Festival Market).

That is what I thought I remembered. I think people are looking at the very preliminary rendering and trying to draw too much from it. Granted that is all we have so that is partly the developers fault but I think we may be jumping to conclussions about a lot of things. As I said in the other thread, if the retail is as described in this article I do not want this project, but I don't think it is acurate.
Also, I think the 15 story thing is stupid and arbitrary.

seicer

March 25th, 2008, 06:32 PM

There will be a blank wall of sorts along Upper (carrying over from the general Lexington thread). I talked to the former Dean today and he was able to get more details about the building by contacting the Webbs. Service entrances, no stores... just a really detracting streetscape along Upper. A blank wall of sorts. Not that they aren't masters of that :P

madtony8k

March 25th, 2008, 07:00 PM

That's not very good news :(

Ian604

March 25th, 2008, 11:45 PM

Not good news at all.

seicer

March 26th, 2008, 12:46 AM

Here are my main sticking points, outside of losing The Dame (if it's not relocated). The others are moving out or are in the process of.

1. The service bay and negative streetscape along Upper. There is a newly opened eatery along Upper, and an Irish pub whose door stays open all day. If it's a service bay, you can guarantee your socks that there will be a trash chute opening into it like Park Plaza, and the smell at times can get overwhelming. What I'd like to see is the service bay be integrated into the underground parking structure, and open up Upper for retail or restaurants/cafe.

2. The overhead walkway across Limestone to the six-story retail/garage. But I'm opposed to most overhead walkways as is.

3. The decor of the six-story retail/garage. Will it match the brown brick of Park Plaza? Or will it be set in the design of Centrepointe? And will the alley be closed off?

4. The loss of Phoenix Park.

5. The auto entrance and exit from main. The space could be used for outdoor seating and park space instead of a long driveway for vehicles. A pull-in could be constructed for those staying at the hotel. The auto entrance/exit is also very detracting from the streetscape, as mentioned earlier.

I received a letter from Park Plaza Management today. The management is very much worried about the loss of 1/3 of Phoenix Park -- the portion that has grass, specifically. Many own pets and use it as a walking area and this would be eliminated completely. The park is also a big seller to those who rent as well. While they state that there will be "many new options" available in terms of dining and retail, it could come at the loss of a historic block and 1/3 of a park.

On April 2, 2008, at 2:00 PM, the project will go in front of the Courthouse Area Design Review Board in a public hearing to allow neighboring properties the opportunity to express their views. It will be in the Fayette County Government Center Council Chamber on the second floor. If you are not able to attend, contact the third-district council representative, Dick DeCamp, at dickd@lfucg.org or 258-3222.

And what a horrible e-mail addy.

gt7834a

March 26th, 2008, 04:27 AM

There say they are totally redoing Pheonix park so I doubt it will stay like it is. Also there is quite a bit of grass between the park and Main st. I would sau that the part they are talking about taking is the least used part of the park.
Demo permits were applied for today for the buildings along Lime apparently so this is all about to come to a head one way or another.

seicer

March 26th, 2008, 04:39 AM

I heard.

Damn. Did you see what Charlotte is building? EpicCentre. What is with these faux names :P The names for some of these projects are beginning to be as corny as those out in the suburbs. What will we have next? The Tan Building at the Oaks? :P

Ian604

March 26th, 2008, 06:25 AM

It's EpiCentre (like the epicenter of...) isn't really a new project. It's been around for a couple years now, it's just had some tough times getting started.

I kind of like the idea of redoing Phoenix Park and the retail/garage because the park really is underused on a day to day basis. I dont like the idea of the blank JumboTron wall though.

I think retail in the garage will draw people to the park moreso than the current buildings nearby. Plus the Courthouse Plaza means we've added more open space downtown in the last couple years than we'll lose with the addition of the garage.

seicer

March 26th, 2008, 02:27 PM

Demolition permits sought (http://www.kentucky.com/454/story/357354.html)
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, March 26, 2008

Business owner Joe Rosenberg has filed for demolition permits for four buildings on South Limestone, in the block where a 40-story hotel and condominium complex have been proposed, while activity among preservationists has increased to save the historic structures on the block.

The demolition applications were filed Monday with the city's Division of Building Inspection. Rosenberg, owner of Rosenberg jewelry store on South Upper, seeks to demolish 109, 111, 117 and 119-121 South Limestone.

In recent days, attention on the block has intensified as preservationists work to save the buildings and have them incorporated into the new development, and the developers push full steam ahead with the $250 million mixed-use CentrePointe project.

About a dozen historic structures are in the block bounded by Vine, Main, Upper and Limestone streets.

Among the businesses there are The Dame music club, Buster's bar and Mia's restaurant. Lexington Farmers Market sets up there on Saturdays between early April and early December.

Efforts to preserve the block include:

•

•

• An e-mail campaign to save the buildings has been launched by Preserve Lexington, which formed over one year ago to save historic buildings in downtown. The group wants members to e-mail their opposition to the project to the Courthouse Area Design Review Board.

That board has a public meeting next Wednesday to review the proposed development plan because about six buildings that front on Main Street are in the Courthouse Design Review Zone.

In this zone, buildings must meet certain design guidelines. Also, the board must give permission before buildings in this zone can be torn down.

The board does not have input on the four buildings for which demolition permits have been applied.

Before demolition, the city requires several steps: The buildings must be tested for asbestos, a plan approved to protect public safety during demolition and sewer lines capped.

The city's Historic Preservation office has three days to decide if it needs to research the historic structures. If it does, the preservation office will have up to 30 days to study and photograph the site. But after that, the Historic Preservation office can't hold up the demolition permit.

Bill Johnston, president of the downtown Historic Western Suburb Neighborhood Association, said the buildings shouldn't come down until financing for the project is approved and building permits obtained.

"You don't want part of that block razed and the financing not come through," he said, recalling a failed downtown project from the 1980s. "That's why we have Phoenix Park. The Phoenix Hotel was torn down and the World Coal Center never got built."

Griffin Van Meter, an organizer of Creative Downtown, agreed.

"It is short-sighted to have these buildings come down before the project is even approved," said VanMeter, who wants more public discussion on the project because public funding will be required for CentrePointe.

"It does not seem just that public money is being asked for this project without public input being sought," he said.

Dudley Webb, chairman of The Webb Cos., has said CentrePointe would rely on tax increment financing, which allows tax revenues from new development to be reinvested in public infrastructure of a project. The TIF application must be approved by Urban County Council and the TIF Commission in Frankfort.

Proponents of saving the buildings say they want to see a compromise where the historic buildings are incorporated into new construction. Asked why one block is so important to downtown, Sonka said, "If anyone has been downtown after 9 or 10 (p.m.) at night, they would know. This is the hub of downtown nightlife for Lexington, Kentucky."

Sonka, whose Web site is barefootandprogressive.com, said without the businesses on that particular block, downtown nightlife "is going to wither and die on the vine."

cartomanlex

March 26th, 2008, 02:37 PM

The demolition applications were filed Monday with the city's Division of Building Inspection. Rosenberg, owner of Rosenberg jewelry store on South Upper, seeks to demolish 109, 111, 117 and 119-121 South Limestone.

The owner for these parcels is listed as Centerpointe LLC. How is it that Joe Rosenberg can apply for the demolition permits? Doesn't he own the other end of the block?

Ian604

March 26th, 2008, 03:16 PM

^^That's what i thought too...

TheDame

March 26th, 2008, 05:46 PM

I was wondering the same thing. Perhaps Rosenberg is indeed a partner in CentrePointe?

I understand their need to go ahead and get moving on this project, but I strongly believe that the city should not allow them to demolish until they have funding. It is totally irresponsible for the city to let someone demolish these buildings without proving that they have the capability to redevelop the property. Lexington is not Dudley's personal Etch-A-Sketch.

gt7834a

March 26th, 2008, 07:11 PM

I have to agree. It would be a travesty if we both lost the buildings and did not get the project. I don't see any reason they can't make it dependent on a building permit being issued.

supertrooper74

March 26th, 2008, 11:56 PM

I kind of like the idea of redoing Phoenix Park and the retail/garage because the park really is underused on a day to day basis. I dont like the idea of the blank JumboTron wall though.

Hey all.

I am a Lexington native, and my family still lives there, but I have been living in Dallas for the past 10 years. I initially came to these boards out of curiousity from all of the construction I've been seeing in Dallas, but I have also been following Lexington's progress. I visit Lexington a couple of times every year, and I always like to drive around town to see what is new. I have been pleasantly surprised the past couple of years at the amount of new projects in the downtown area...something that has really been needed for a long time. But, I've also been disappointed that the same old, rundown, ugly buildings and facades have just been left alone. I'm excited about CentrePointe, and hope that it really gets built. I can sympathize with those that will miss The Dame and the other establishments if it happens, but nothing is forever. I remember when I was in high school (go Dunbar Bulldogs!), and The Metro was in The Dame's location. It closed, even though it was pretty popular. And that block really is unattractive. Yeah, yeah,...others say it's historic...but I think it's just old. Others say it's the only example of "insert any type" of architecture in the city, but that doesn't mean it's a good example.

Anyway...the reason I quoted the post about the jumbotron, is that it could actually have the potential to be pretty cool. Victory Plaza in Dallas has several giant jumbotrons and it brings a pretty neat atmoshpere to the area. Granted, the area in Dallas is on a much grander scale, but Lexington's version could be just right.

http://www.mediaarchitecture.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/VMN01s.jpg

So....yeah.

Ian604

March 27th, 2008, 07:49 AM

If it's dont like that it could be really cool. I've seen some pretty crappy ones too though.

Also it looks like the mods put the correct height for the project. The question marks were bothering me.

seicer

March 27th, 2008, 03:14 PM

Personally, I'm not sold at all on the Jumbotron screens. I'd personally take greenspace in an urban envrion over electronics or a fancy "WOW" factor.

gt7834a

March 27th, 2008, 05:05 PM

I think you are underestimating the jumbotrons. I think they would be a great addition if done properly. If they show movies on there ever Sat. night in the Summer and people can set up in the courthouse park that will bring a lot of people downtown and it will cost almost nothing. They have 'Screen on the green' in Atlanta that I used to go to where they would show old black and white movies and they would get huge crowds. Not this is not Atlanta but I do think people would come out for something like that. Look how many people show up for pretty bad bands for Thursday night live. Other times you can give out info on downtown lexington, show scenes from throught Lexington, etc. I really like the idea a lot. Even if this project does not happen I think they should look into movies being shown on the side of the Pheonix Building. This is a cheap and easy way to get people downtown in summer.

Also, there will still be a fairly long stretch of green space even if this goes in. You are talking about 1/3 of the park, a park that really isn't used much other than bums hanging out there and apparently people with dogs at Park Plaza peeing there. You would still have 2/3 of Pheonix park, new park level retail, and the entire courthouse park which is 2 blocks long. That is a lot of park still. There are not a lot of cities with 2.5 continuous blocks of green space right in the center of their downtown. Also if they give the park a face lift 2/3 of a really nice park is better than a full mediocure park that doesn't get used.

cartomanlex

March 27th, 2008, 07:38 PM

TheDame

March 27th, 2008, 08:27 PM

The idea of a Jumbotron in the public open space of the Court House Plaza/Park Plaza area has been noted in the LDDA book "What Can Be". This is not a new idea. If the movies/videos are shown, with or without the FEI Games, and they were to reach the popularity of, say the Free Friday Flicks, or the Big Band and Jazz at Ecton Park, or the Tuesday night bluegrass shows on Southland Dr., then all of downtown would benefit. On a good night the Big Band and Jazz series will outdraw the Dame three times over. We are also talking about something that involves the whole family, not just the young professionals.

This is something that should be done even if Centerpointe is not built.

I'd say it's safe to assume that the Courthouse Plaza photo in the "What Can Be" publication was highly influenced by the CentrePointe planning process. It's the same idea, not a new one or an old one.

We've had movies shown there before. Anyone ever heard of projectors? "A Hard Days Night" was screened on the side of the former K.U. building when George Martin came to speak a few years ago. There's no reason they can't do this again, used jumbotron or not.

Glad you could find room in there to attack The Dame again. I knew you had it in you!

cartomanlex

March 27th, 2008, 09:24 PM

Glad you could find room in there to attack The Dame again. I knew you had it in you!

You compare The Dame to other downtown entertainment venues on a regular basis, to show how you are a superior asset for Lexington. What I stated was that whether or not the Centerpointe project is built, an outdoor projection of movies downtown, would be an equally good asset.

I fail to see how you can claim that the work of LDDA on one hand supports your continued existence, and on another hand is colluding with others against your right to exist. You apparently feel that, no matter what I say, I am wishing you ill. Even though I still think(regardless of what my wife thinks) that the Dame is still a bright spot in Lexington's entertainment scene.

TheDame

March 27th, 2008, 09:40 PM

You compare The Dame to other downtown entertainment venues on a regular basis, to show how you are a superior asset for Lexington. What I stated was that whether or not the Centerpointe project is built, an outdoor projection of movies downtown, would be an equally good asset.

I fail to see how you can claim that the work of LDDA on one hand supports your continued existence, and on another hand is colluding with others against your right to exist. You apparently feel that, no matter what I say, I am wishing you ill. Even though I still think(regardless of what my wife thinks) that the Dame is still a bright spot in Lexington's entertainment scene.

Now this is insulting. Find one post where I have compared The Dame to other downtown entertainment venues. Good luck with that.

Where have I claimed anything about the DDA supporting The Dame??

Honestly, what the hell are you talking about? I've never said any of these things.

seicer

March 27th, 2008, 09:51 PM

I've been to several of the "Big Band and Jazz" series held in Ecton Park during the warm summer months. The crowd there was nowhere near The Dame on Friday and Saturday nights. Even during their all-ages performances on Sunday and other days had considerably more people attend than the series at the park.

Ian604

March 28th, 2008, 04:06 AM

I whole heartedly believe that we either should or shouldnt have Jumbotrons...

seicer

March 28th, 2008, 04:53 AM

The Dame has 90 days to move out (http://www.kentucky.com/181/story/359100.html)
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, March 27, 2008

It doesn't come as a terrible surprise, but the popular downtown music venue The Dame will close on the downtown block targeted for a $250 million hotel and condominium complex.

Joe Rosenberg, who owns the building, last night called it "an agreed separation for a sum of money." The Dame has 90 days to move out once the check has been delivered, Rosenberg said.

He did not say how much the Dame was given.

Tom Yost, president of Atlanta-based Harvester Group, that owns the night spot will be in Lexington on Saturday to start looking for a new location, said Nick Sprouse, the club's talent buyer.

Sprouse said The Dame faces two immediate dilemmas: finding a new home and finding the money to move.

The Dame does not want to close, he said. "We want to remain downtown. We feel we are an important part of the downtown revitalization that's happened in the past five or six years."

Sprouse is hopeful that with three months' lead time, the music club will find a spot. But it will have to be a place where its neighbors are not disturbed by live music seven nights a week.

The Dame opened in April 2003 and has become the hub of downtown night life for the under 30-crowd. A wide range of acts have appeared there, from comedy and theatrical, to jazz, punk and rock music groups.

Country star Kenny Chesney drew a capacity crowd on March 7. Ramel Bradley, a senior star on this season's University of Kentucky basketball team, will debut his new CD there on April 25.

TheDame

March 28th, 2008, 05:14 AM

Of course, Rosenberg makes it seem like we took money to move. He enacted the buyout clause of our lease. We have absolutely no choice but to vacate within 90 days.

Ian604

March 28th, 2008, 09:07 AM

Will the buyout be of any significant help in finding a new place? I know you probably cant give a dollar amount.

TheDame

March 28th, 2008, 09:21 AM

Will the buyout be of any significant help in finding a new place? I know you probably cant give a dollar amount.

No, it won't be anywhere near what we need to move The Dame.

TheDame

March 28th, 2008, 10:05 AM

Strange, Kentucky.com has changed the headline of the story to "The Dame is being paid to move out, seeking new venue". I wonder why they changed it to make us look like willing participants in all of this....

seicer

March 28th, 2008, 02:10 PM

That's the H-L for you.

A place that lives in memory (http://www.kentucky.com/454/story/359336.html)
Old photos and stories might soon be all that's left of once-vital downtown block
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, March 28, 2008

Graves Cox, a men's and boys' clothing store, was a fixture on East Main Street from the time it was opened in 1888 by business partners Joe Graves and Leonard Cox.

"Nobody sold more Palm Beach suits in the state than Graves Cox," Joe Graves, 77, grandson of the founder, said earlier this week.

While in high school, Graves and his sister, Nancy Graves Talbott, worked between Thanksgiving and Christmas on the three nights a week when Graves Cox stayed open till 9 p.m.

"The company hired 20 extra employees just for the first floor for Christmas season," Graves recalled.

Graves Cox was on a vibrant block in a bustling downtown, Graves said.

It was part of the same block where developer Dudley Webb has announced plans for a high-rise mixed-use hotel and condominium complex. The CentrePointe project calls for demolition of 14 historic buildings.

On another corner was the Coney Island restaurant, opened in 1920 by Mike Levas.

"Everything that happened, happened at Main and Lime," said Evangelos "Angel" Levas, Mike's son.

In 1957, while Angel's parents were in Europe, he and his brother, John, converted the small eatery to Levas' Restaurant, one of the city's most popular white-tablecloth restaurants. With its famous martinis and original art on the walls, it was a place to see and be seen.

Griffin VanMeter is an organizer of Creative Downtown, a group trying to preserve the old buildings on that block, and memories of downtown. Last week, he taped oral histories of several people who remembered businesses once on that block.

Excerpts from the oral histories will be shown at 10:30 a.m. Saturday at the Kentucky Theatre. The event, Wake Up Lexington, will feature speakers on the historic, architectural and cultural importance of the block, plus ways to incorporate the buildings into the new development.

Many retail businesses have called the proposed CentrePointe block home over the years, including Graves Cox, Walgreen's, F.W. Woolworth, S.S. Kresge's, Johnny Furlong's restaurant, the Coney Island and later Levas' restaurant, Fred Fugazzi's restaurant and ice cream parlor, the Fig Tree restaurant, Joe Rosenberg's pawn shop and jewelry store, Wing's Chinese restaurant and other stores.

The Woolworth building was demolished in 2004. The Graves Cox building was torn down earlier.

On Monday, applications for demolition permits were filed with the city's Building Inspection office to raze four buildings in the block: 109, 111, 117, 119-21 South Limestone.

The protocol for demolition includes sending the applications to the city's division of Historic Preservation for review to see whether the buildings should be researched and documented before they are torn down. The office can take up to 30 days to complete the research.

Bettie Kerr, director of Historic Preservation, said on Wednesday that her office will put a 30-day hold on demolition for three of the buildings -- 109, 111 and 119-121 -- while her staff measures, photographs and does other historic research.

A bustling downtown

Graves and Levas did not participate in the oral history project last week at the Central Library, but they, like many others, have vivid memories of the block and downtown.

"It's hard to believe how bustling downtown was then," Graves said earlier this week. "There were probably 100 stores downtown, most along Main Street."

Graves Cox survives today in The Triangle Center, run by Len Cox, grandson of the original partner.

But in the time before shopping malls, people came downtown, frequently by streetcar or city bus, to buy furniture, shoes and clothing for the whole family.

Downtown had a variety of inexpensive lunch counters and fancier places including the popular Canary Cottage and Golden Horseshoe.

Doctors and dentists were downtown. The Lexington Clinic was at the corner of Market Street and West Second and patients went to St. Joseph Hospital, now the site of Connie Griffith Manor.

For the oral history project, Betty Pugh Wilkirson recalled when her father Hayward Wilkirson opened the S.S. Kresge Co., in 1925 in the building that is now The Dame. "It was a cheap department store that sold pots and pans, candy, socks, some clothes. It was similar to Woolworth's but it didn't have a lunch counter," she said.

A reporter for The Lexington Herald, Wilkirson said she was the first woman on the night shift to cover hard news, and eventually became a police reporter.

Some nights when she got off work, she and other reporters would go to Johnny Furlongs, a little restaurant on South Limestone, in a building now slated for demolition."Uncle Johnny always had a huge roast beef and a huge ham cooked in the window, so you could see it," said Wilkirson, 88. "Sometimes we'd sit around a big round table and he would cook pork chops and corncakes for us at 2 a.m."

Fred W. Croney Jr. , 52, recalled the segregated lunch counter at Woolworth's. "We had been in there before and been served," he said. But one day when he was downtown with his mother and brother, "The person at the counter decided to enforce segregation. They said we could buy food, but we couldn't eat in there."

"My mother was a proud woman. She was very, very angry and hurt," he said.

Croney said his mother tried to shelter her children from the pain of racial discrimination whenever she could. After the incident at Woolworth, "We never went to Woolworth's again. We went to McCrorys."

Frances Swinford Barr, 82, remembered going downtown on her date with her late husband, Bill Swinford. After they married, he bought a diamond pin for his wife at Rosenberg's. "It was my first piece of good jewelry," she said.

A Sunday closing

From the time he was a youngster, "Angel" worked in the Coney Island, which sold hot dogs, hamburgers and chili.

"It never closed. We were open 24/7," Levas said. "My dad would work all day and half the night. He would go home about midnight, dead tired, and the relief cook Louie Week came in to work from midnight to 8 a.m."

One Sunday, Week left at 8 a.m. and "Angel" at age 10 was there alone. He called his father to say "Louie had to go home." Levas' father said to lock up and come home. "I said, 'Where's the key?' My father said, 'I have no idea. It hasn't been locked since 1920.'"

"Angel" called Pinkston's lock company, which came out and made a key. "So then we closed that Sunday and we never opened on Sunday again," he chuckled.

During the 1970s and 1980s, downtown retail died. In an attempt at revitalization, Dudley Webb and his brother, Donald, opened Festival Market at the corner of East Main and North Broadway. "When it opened, it had 32 restaurants, so the downtown pie was sliced an additional 32 times," Levas said. "Most of us didn't make it, and neither did they."

IF YOU GO

What: "Wake Up Lexington, An Event to Save Our Block." Preservationists want to save old buildings in the block bounded by Vine, East Main, South Upper and South Limestone. Speakers will discuss the architectural, historic and cultural importance of the block, plus alternatives to the design of the proposed 40-story hotel and condominium project planned for the block.

When: 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Saturday
Where: Kentucky Theatre, 214 East Main Street
Admission: Free to the public.
For more information: Go to http://www.preservelexington.org.

cartomanlex

March 28th, 2008, 04:16 PM

That's the H-L for you.

The whole article, and they can't get the location correct. It's WEST main St.

seicer

March 28th, 2008, 04:26 PM

Oh, I was referring to TheDame's comment. The H-L makes glaring errors all the time.

gt7834a

March 28th, 2008, 06:11 PM

It turns out that block has been ugly for alot longer than I knew. By far the best looking building on the block was the Woolworth building, which I really wish they could have saved. Everything else, for the most part, was very basic. Downtown has a lot of very beautiful buildings but this block never did really have a lot of them. They all look very utilitarian. Short St, for example has way more nice buildings on it. Market st, next to Cheapside Park has several really well done buildings. Really, other than the Dame and maybe where Triple Crown Lounge was , which is just OK IMO, those are not very attractive buildings and from the look of the older photos have not been for a long time and most never were. I have always wondered what was under the metal front of Rite Aid, it turns out it wasn't very attractive either.

BTW, the caption under the picture of the Triple Crown lounge, clearly looking North says, 'The Corner of Main and Lime' despite the fact that it is obviously Vine and Lime. It is a shame downtown department stores don't really exist anymore. It would be very cool to have a department store and other nice retail downtown. Oh well, I guess those times are past us.

seicer

March 28th, 2008, 06:23 PM

Nah, the corner building was never very attractive. Have you looked at a lot of images of buildings from the 1950s to the 1980s? Ugly, ugly, ugly buildings. Metal facades. That was their way of modernizing the buildings. I'm not for sure when the Limestone/Main corner building was built, but it doesn't seem to be all _that_ old (late 1930s?).

Want to see ugly?

Before: Facade installed in the late 1960s to "modernize" the building and cover up some scorch marks after a small fire.
http://www.abandonedonline.net/content/3/photos/020804_2.jpg

Today: Facade removal began in the late 1990s after Sears moved out IIRC in 1993 by AD Restoration. AD went bankrupt, and facade removal stalled until a few years ago. But a lot of the ornate trim and facade was @#$^ed over.
http://www.abandonedonline.net/content/3/photos/DSC_0516.jpg

I've posted more here (http://abandonedonline.net/index.php?catid=3). Thankfully that's not in Lexington, but two hours east.

Ian604

March 29th, 2008, 09:18 PM

Gray suggests hotel design competition
CENTREPOINTE DEVELOPER OPEN TO IDEAS
By Beverly Fortune
BFORTUNE@HERALD-LEADER.COM

Vice Mayor Jim Gray yesterday proposed an international design competition to come up with a possible new design for the proposed CentrePointe hotel and condominium project on Main Street.

He called the project "massive" and out of scale with downtown.

Gray met late Friday afternoon with developer Dudley Webb to propose an international competition, with Michael Speaks, new dean of the University of Kentucky College of Design, serving as an adviser to the competition.

Webb asked Gray to submit his ideas in writing. "We will look at them," Webb said. "If it's a design competition of ideas, certainly we are flexible."

While Webb would not commit to a redesign of the project, he said, "It is worth having a conversation about."

Architects for the project are Culpepper, McAuliffe and Meaders Inc. of Atlanta, partnered with Sherman Carter Barnhart architectural firm of Lexington.

Webb acknowledged criticism of the project but said that, in the last couple of weeks, "The atmosphere has gotten a little more conciliatory. Everybody wants to do what is best for Lexington."

Webb plans to attend the "Awake Lexington" event, a rally to preserve the block where the project would go, at the Kentucky Theatre at 10:30 a.m. Saturday.

Webb said the building has to be big enough to justify the cost. He projects spending $10 million just for the land. "Any architect is going to have to respect that," Webb said. "We can't have a four-story building on that site."

Also, launching an international design competition would push the completion date further into the future. When CentrePointe was announced, Webb said he wanted the project on "an aggressive schedule" so it would be completed in time for the Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games in the fall of 2010.

The design as unveiled on March 4 shows a 40-story tower that would include a major four-star hotel with 243 rooms and 77 residential condominiums with 26,000 square feet of retail space on the ground floor.

However, Webb said the height of the building has been scaled back five stories.

The proposed CentrePointe covers a block bounded by West Main, West Vine, South Limestone and South Upper. Currently on the block are 14 buildings, some eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Plans call for razing the structures to make way for the project.

Because a portion of the block lies within the Courthouse Area Design District, the development must be approved by the Courthouse Design Review Board. The board must also give its OK to the demolition of buildings in this zone.

On Wednesday, a public hearing is scheduled for 2 p.m. in the Urban County Council chambers at the Government Center. The CentrePointe project will be presented to the board for approval or disapproval. The public also will have an opportunity to comment.

Preservationists say they want to see the block redeveloped, but with new construction done in a way to preserve some or all of the old facades. However, Webb said most of the facades are unstable and "not worthy of preservation."

Gray said the new project will have a significant impact on the economic and cultural viability of downtown.

"Big buildings alone don't make a downtown exciting," he said. "People make a downtown -- pedestrians on the sidewalk with fun things to do, small shops, cafŽs, creating a quality of life that stimulates economic activity downtown."

Speaks, who assumed his new post only a month and a half ago, said he had seen the CentrePointe project.

"I understand the opposition, but I understand the need for development," he said. "It's not an issue of development or not development, it's an issue of smart development or not smart development."

Speaks came to UK from California, where he taught and was head of graduate studies at the Southern California Institute of Architecture. He also taught at the University of California at Los Angeles.

An international competition would give an opportunity "to really test out the current proposal and to see what alternatives might be possible, especially given the range of design talent in the world today."

A competition would present a new opportunity to look at "not just that building, but at that site. It seems very important to meet, to retain the cultural DNA of the city" that the CentrePointe design might wipe away.

superflymike

March 30th, 2008, 01:40 AM

that competition sounds like a really good idea

seicer

March 30th, 2008, 04:10 PM

Theater filled for rally to save buildings (http://www.kentucky.com/454/story/361283.html)
Developer attends Centrepointe Protest
By Michelle Ku, Herald-Leader, March 30, 2008

The buildings on the block where the proposed CentrePointe hotel and condominium project is slated for are historic because they depict the evolution of Lexington, Janie-Rice Brother told a packed room at the Kentucky Theatre on Saturday.

The 14 buildings, at least 10 of which are eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places, are a tangible link to Lexington's past with visible signs of more than a century of construction, architectural styles and renovation, Brother said. "They tell the story of our community. They are an embodiment of a city's originality, of its character."

Brother, who works at the Kentucky Heritage Council, was speaking at "Wake Up Lexington," a rally to preserve the block bounded by West Main, West Vine, South Limestone and South Upper. Plans call for razing all 14 buildings to make way for CentrePointe.

Because a portion of the block lies within the Courthouse Area Design District, the development must be approved by the Courthouse Design Review Board. The board must also sign off on the demolition of the buildings in the zone.

At the rally, speakers talked about the importance of the block where The Dame and Buster's are located. Examples of projects that incorporated historic buildings were displayed. A short documentary about the history of the block was shown.

Between 400 and 450 people attended the rally.

"We've been getting e-mails from thousands of people, but to look at the back of the theater to see we have people in the aisles, we have people in the front row sitting on the floor, it overwhelms," said Hayward Wilkirson, president of the board of directors of Preserve Lexington, which organized the rally.

Wilkirson said Preserve Lexington's goal was to reach a compromise with Dudley Webb, the developer of CentrePointe, for a development with cutting-edge architecture while preserving the historic fabric of the block.

Webb attended Saturday's rally. Everything that was said there about downtown is legitimate, he said.

"We share the same concerns," he said after the event. "We want to do what's best for the community. It's one of the reasons I came, to see if there were new ideas."

The design for CentrePointe isn't cast in concrete, Webb said. When CentrePointe was first announced on March 4, designs showed a 40-story tower that would include a major four-star hotel with 243 rooms and 77 residential condominiums with 26,000 square feet of retail space on the ground floor.

Since then, the height of the building has been scaled back by five stories in response to concerns. The building is now at the absolute minimum to make the project possible, Webb said.

"We'd love to incorporate the facades of the old buildings, but a couple of them maybe could be saved," Webb said. "But beyond that, most are decrepit and falling or have been modified to the point that they aren't historic anymore."

There would be problems saving the buildings because they would crumble once blasting for the underground parking begins, Webb said.

Since several buildings have previously been razed in the block, the task of salvaging the existing buildings is that much more difficult, Webb said. "When we did Victorian Square, for example, that was 17 contiguous buildings you could really do something with and make a grandiose statement."

What's next?
On Wednesday, the project will be presented to the Courthouse Design Review Board for approval or disapproval during a public hearing scheduled for 2 p.m. in council chambers of the Urban County Government Center, 200 East Main Street.

madtony8k

March 30th, 2008, 08:28 PM

So they are taking the project to the review board.. is this where the project potentially goes from pro to app? Will we know whether or not it's approved by the end of the week?

TheDame

March 30th, 2008, 10:03 PM

So they are taking the project to the review board.. is this where the project potentially goes from pro to app? Will we know whether or not it's approved by the end of the week?

They still don't have financing for the project.

madtony8k

March 31st, 2008, 01:47 AM

I know.. but the city approving the design has nothing to do with financing.

Signature tower in Nashville was approved before it had funding, and there is still the question of whether or not it can be funded.

Webb is confident about this project. It sounds like if it is approved, Webb will build what they can.

TheDame

March 31st, 2008, 02:33 AM

cartomanlex

March 31st, 2008, 02:50 AM

Perhaps you didn't hear Webb when he said that the project will not happen without T.I.F. funding.

Do you know how T.I.F. funding works? The Webbs have the funding in place to start the project. The problem would be paying off the short term loans with the money from the difference of tax money that the developer gets to keep from the new development. I don't see them not getting their permission.

On a side note, How did the visit of Tom Yost go this weekend?

TheDame

March 31st, 2008, 03:26 AM

Do you know how T.I.F. funding works? The Webbs have the funding in place to start the project. The problem would be paying off the short term loans with the money from the difference of tax money that the developer gets to keep from the new development. I don't see them not getting their permission.

On a side note, How did the visit of Tom Yost go this weekend?

I don't know all of the details of the T.I.F., but I have to assume that Dudley Webb is not wrong about his own financing when he says the project won't happen without the T.I.F.

As for Tom and The Dame, we're currently looking at potential spaces.

madtony8k

March 31st, 2008, 05:03 AM

Perhaps you didn't hear Webb when he said that the project will not happen without T.I.F. funding.

Yes, but funding and approval are two different things. Approval doesn't mean the project will be built, approval is just permission from the city to build on the property.

I know that it won't be built without the funding. The approval is the next step in the project, which means they have permission to build if they have the funding. I am wondering if the discussion on wednesday is one to determine whether or not the project is approved.

TheDame

March 31st, 2008, 05:21 AM

The meeting is a step but not the step. The Courthouse Area Design Review Board (or something to that effect) has to approve any modifications to the buildings in the vicinity of the courthouses.

There will be a separate meeting for the T.I.F. where the public will have input on the project.

seicer

March 31st, 2008, 05:30 AM

s for Tom and The Dame, we're currently looking at potential spaces.

Let us know what happens. While walking in downtown Huntington (W.Va.), I noted two vacancies and one space that functions as a nightclub similar to The Dame. If we only had some of those buildings in Lexington, it would be perfect :P

gt7834a

March 31st, 2008, 06:02 PM

I would think there are still several more steps left but this is certainly a hurdle. The project can stop here but it can't get fully approved here. I am sure they will still need a development plan approval as well as TIF approval. I imagine this project will see some pretty substantial modification as this process plays out. I will be shocked, given the public interest, if this project is completed in time for 2010 games.

cartomanlex

April 1st, 2008, 03:36 AM

From Tom Eblen Blog Bluegrass and Beyond on Kentucky.com

Dudley Webb answers CentrePointe critics (http://tomeblen.wordpress.com/2008/03/31/dudley-webb-answers-centrepointe-critics/)

March 31, 2008
This afternoon, Lexington developer Dudley Webb sent me this letter replying to critics of his proposed CentrePointe development:
I just read with interest your opinions about our project and I welcome them, just as I did those that I heard at the meeting at the Theater on Saturday.

I do have some thoughts about them and wanted to take just a minute to share them with you.

First of all, I was appreciative of their invitation, found it to be very well organized and informative, and appreciated the cordiality with which I was received. My disappointment was that even though I attended the meeting in hopes that I could gain ideas as to how we can better our project, some of those attending relayed to me that they didn’t think I should have been there in that I inhibited their discussion as to how they were going to stop this project. Later that afternoon, I found that this dialogue had again digressed into some of the same old trash talking and personal insults that they had already been directing at us on their Web Pages and Blogging sites. It seems that even the distinguished retired ex-Dean (http://dialogic.blogspot.com/2008/03/anthony-eardley-position-on.html#links) of UK’s Architectural School, a self anointed expert on mixed-use development, had by then joined in with diatribe. To them, all I can say is that they too are entitled to their opinions and that they have been considered. With all of that now said, we still are adamant that what we have proposed is in the best interest of this city and all of its people. More importantly, it should be understood that we are not embarrassed about the many great projects and civic undertakings that we have done here and we certainly aren’t going to start apologizing for them now.

The good news was that I found most of those present on Saturday were very sincere and concerned citizens who care about Lexington and share in our notion that it can and should be the best that it can be. This was why I wanted to attend - to listen to their thoughts and ideas about their vision for our downtown as well as our property at that location. Some there didn’t realize that such a new project there would be downtown’s first in over twenty years and that of the last four major projects that have been done there, it was The Webb Companies that had done them all - some $200,000,000 worth. Some appreciated it, some didn’t and some simply didn’t care.

A few I talked to didn’t agree that our downtown is still somewhat struggling or that it even needs another shot in the arm like this to kick start it again. Some wouldn’t even agree that we want and need more businesses, visitors, tourists and full-time downtown residents, more convention goers, more shoppers, more patrons for our restaurant entertainment venues or more people on our streets down there. Consensus about anything is obviously difficult to achieve, especially when some just simply like it as it is.

The interesting thing is that it was just about three years ago at this time that our local Tourism Bureau encouraged our Company to again get involved by developing a new hotel property in and for our downtown. Their reasoning was that we were losing meetings and conventions to other cities because we did not have enough downtown hotel rooms to effectively compete for this business. At that point, there was consensus on that and that we needed a new Hotel down there. Ironically, the stars seemed to have finally aligned so as to allow us to bring such a world class, $250,000,000 development to our downtown. Now, after expending all of this time, effort and the money to try to make this happen, a few present seem intent on now trying to thwart that effort entirely, or to force us to allow them to impose their own visions and tastes as to what this project should be and what it should look like.

I did also listen intently as they described our buildings in the block as being historic and worthy of preservation. What I didn’t hear though was anyone else in the Theater that was interested in acquiring these buildings so as to preserve them. The fact is that many of these buildings have been sitting there vacant and/or available for many years with no efforts or offers from these people to buy them or to protect from their demise. Neither did I sense that there was anyone there who was prepared to step up and undertake these risks or to expend the time and the effort to make any such a project happen here, whether it be a historic rehab or totally new. As you know, we have repeatedly challenged many of those present and their organizations that if they truly want to save the old buildings or to do a new development on block like they want, they can and should buy these properties from us at our cost and do it themselves. Again though, nobody wants to do that either.

The bottom line is that everybody in town has an opinion about our property and what we are proposing to try to do with it to make our downtown better. Although we appreciate that they have every right to have such opinions, they should also respect that we own the property and that it is our skin that is in the game.

Basically, I think everyone knows that projects like this cannot be designed by Committee, or by consensus. As to the thoughts about conducting some type of design competition to ultimately decide what we build and what it would look like, this might have been a great idea under normal circumstances. However, as our Hotel partner and a major investor in this project has pointed out, this won’t work here for several reasons. The first problem is that we have already hired Architects and Engineers who have been working on this project for more than 18 months now and that we already have contractual obligations with and to them. He also points out that J. W. Marriott will not even consider allowing one of their proposed properties to become a part of such a competition. They have their own design standards, proprietary criteria as well as Architects of preference who design their hotels. Fortunately, they have already arranged for us to work with one of their best on this project and they certainly don’t want us to now throw him out and start over. Although he was appreciative of the idea, he simply feels that it is now far too late for us to go back and start over.

In regards to design, I also listened to several comments during the meeting that were critical of the design of our Radisson Hotel/World Trade Center complex, as well as, our Lexington Financial Center and our Woodlands projects that we also built in the downtown. To that, all we can say is that they were the very best that we could make them at that point in time when the prime rate of interest was floating at above 15% and our downtown was truly floundering. We would also suggest to these folks that they can now second guess and criticize them if they like, but they should also think where downtown would be today without them and the loyal businesses and employees that continue to headquarter, work and/or live down there as a result of these being there. These too were the best that they could be at the time.

Tom, I liken our current situation to when many local critics expressed that they didn’t like the colors that we selected for the historic Victorian Square facades that we were then trying to save and restore. Once again, all we could do was listen, make the best and most informed decision that we could under the circumstances and to then proceed with what we as the owners of and investors in the project thought was best for the project and the downtown. This situation appears to be a similar. This is not to say that we are still not trying to listen or that we have closed the door on our consideration of other ideas. It is just that we have now been working on this project for over two years now and that we cannot drag this out forever. It is time that we recognize the realities involved this opportunity and then move on.

The first reality that everyone seems to have forgotten in all of this is that our Government elected not to adopt the Downtown Master Plan that many of those there yesterday had so steadfastly supported and often refer to when they voice opposition to our project. Instead our City decided by virtue of its latest Comprehensive Plan that it did adopt that this community should grow up through the development of projects like this one for our downtown, rather than out into the horse farms and green belt as others would have preferred. We agree as most do that this was the best and most responsible choice for the City to make, although some there yesterday stated that even though the Downtown Master Plan had been discarded, it was already paid for by the City and should still be respected and enforced. This was also the exact reason that the Fayette Alliance which consists of our most prominent thoroughbred and farming interests have since conditionally endorsed our project.

Strangely enough, absolutely none of the consultants that prepared that Downtown Master Plan ever bothered to contact our Company or many of our other constituents for our thoughts and input during their supposed planning phase, this despite the fact that we are still the largest private owner of real estate in the downtown. Again though, it was our government’s decision to adopt the newest and latest Comprehensive Plan which they did and one would think that we now have every right to rely upon it in the planning our project. The Comprehensive Plan does not impose height limitations for such projects, but to allay concerns, we have even offered to reduce the height of the proposal to 35 stories, this being the absolute minimum number at which our project will work economically. That overture hasn’t been accepted either.

The next reality that we must deal with is that absolutely nobody can develop a major high rise complex there and still save either these buildings and/or their facades. Both Preserve Lexington and The Bluegrass Trust need to pick their battles and focus on the ones that make sense, not on these old buildings of which so little is left. Under the standard that was talked about on Saturday, the Eastland, Southland, Gardenside and Cardinal Valley Shopping Centers are eligible to be deemed as historic which makes absolutely no sense. Again, we are great supporters of historic preservation, but we need to get realistic about this process.
As I said at the meeting, our consultants and contractors have repeatedly reaffirmed to everyone concerned that we can’t save these few old buildings and/or their facades and have this project too. As to those facades, most have long since been torn off and/or modified by prior owners to the extent that they are longer older historic. As to the remainder, they simply will not withstand our having to drill and blast down through 15′ of solid limestone that is under the entire block so as to create the underground parking that the City’s consultants and planners now say they prefer instead of surface garages. What we have since agreed to do though is to donate any of these buildings or any of these facades to anyone who will move and preserve them if they will move them on a timely basis.

The third reality is that like it or not, this is the only location that is now available for high rise development in our center core and where such a project can and should be built. If we cross Main Street, we are then most certainly threatening buildings that are absolutely worthy of preservation. If we go south of High Street, we are again in another historic area that should not be disturbed. This only leaves this one linear strip running east from the Civic Center between Main and Vine Streets where such high-rise developments can be built and most of those blocks already have viable developments on them.

As to the concerns being expressed about the tenants of our old buildings in the block that will be displaced, our representatives and those of the City have been working very diligently with these tenants during recent months and most have already found new locations in the downtown for their businesses. This block will not be the “entertainment venue” that our young people want and our focus should now be in finding a replacement venue for them as well.

As to The Farmers Market, the reality is that we too want them to continue to operate in this same area, have met with them many times and we think this issued is now worked out to where they can do so. I think they will tell you that we have always been a huge supporter of the Farmer’s Market and have always cooperated with them and the City in an effort to insure that they remain downtown. In that regard, we have offered our cooperation to them and the City so as to encourage them to continue to operate during the upcoming season along the 200 and 300 Blocks of West Vine Street blocks that we likewise own. Upon completion of our construction, we would hope that they might then possibly utilize the street space along all three of these blocks along Vine as and when it is appropriate. Although this will be a decision that the City and the Farmer’s Market will ultimately make, I assure you that they have no greater fans or loyal customers than our families, our employees, our tenants, our guests and our business interests.

Tom, I don’t know what more that we can do than what we have done. We own this property and we now want to develop it into something great that everyone will be proud of. We intend to do this in accordance with the goals, objectives and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan as well as the Courthouse Overlay requirements. Unfortunately, this will require us to demolish those old buildings and we have always been up front with the fact that they will need to go. As I told your paper yesterday, if this were the Victorian Square buildings that needed to be saved, we would step up and do it again, but they are not. These are now but fragments of our past and to rationalize that that Abe Lincoln might have one day shopped in one of them is disingenuous. We too are great proponents of the Bluegrass Trust and we have encouraged their representatives in the past to prioritize as to what is truly important to their preservation efforts, then pick their battles and focus on winning them as opposed to being constantly distracted by skirmishes that can’t or shouldn’t be won.

All we can say is that our improvements will meet and/or to exceed the requirements of all our governmental and regulatory agencies, plus will also be the first major LEED Certified and all green high-rise complex to ever be built in this State. Our investors should be applauded rather than criticized. What should not be forgotten either is that this project will generate over 900 jobs during construction and more than 900 permanent jobs once it is complete. This is compared to the 35 full time employees that have been working during the last year within the entire block. Contrary to what was said by someone at the meeting, even though this we are proposing to use TIF bonds to pay for the public infrastructure portion of this project, (those costs that the City would usually have paid for — i. e. street work, sewers, etc.), the City will still receive millions of dollars during the early years of this project and even more once these bonds are amortized. My frustration is that we have given these people all the reasons in the world to love this project, but they still want more which we can’t deliver. Some appear to have simply decided to try to take our property without paying for it or to redesign a new project for us at our expense. Surely, they understand why we aren’t going to agree to either.

Tom, the bottom line is that we agree with Preserve Lexington that it is now time for the designated representatives of that organization, The Bluegrass Trust and all other appropriate parties to sit down with us and hammer out some intelligent compromises about this project so that it can proceed. Like it or not, sooner or later something new and significant is going to be developed on that block and with the costs of the land being as high as it is and the conditions of the properties as bad as they are, the ultimate result and conclusion will be the same - - that these buildings can’t be restored and that their facades cannot be saved. During the interim, those who oppose our project should not be allowed to confuse the public and our elected officials by suggesting that these can and should be incorporated into this project when they know full well that they can’t be. This is a disservice to the project and the public.

We are still hopeful that in the end, reason and compromise will somehow still prevail and that we can then all move on with the business of making Lexington a better place in which to live, work and raise our families.

Thanks for listening,
Dudley Webb,
for Centrepointe, LLC

cartomanlex

April 1st, 2008, 03:41 AM

Webb rejects architecture competition for CentrePointe

By Beverly Fortune

BFORTUNE@HERALD-LEADER.COM

An architectural competition to come up with a new design for the proposed CentrePointe hotel-condominium development is over before it got started.

On Monday, developer Dudley Webb nixed the idea of conducting a design competition proposed last week by Lexington Vice Mayor Jim Gray.

Gray held a press conference earlier Monday afternoon regarding the downtown block slated for the $250 million redevelopment to release details of how a competition could be organized. He announced that the firm of Jones/Kroloff, an internationally recognized firm in the field of managing design competitions, would be hired to manage the competition.
Webb said his partner in the project, John Anderson, also opposed a competition.

Anderson is owner of J.H. Anderson Holdings of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and the one bringing the Marriott hotel chain to the table. Anderson told Webb that Marriott would not even consider allowing one of its proposed projects to be part of such a competition.

"They have their own design standards and proprietary criteria and their architects of preference who design their hotels," Webb said. Also, the project has been worked on for 18 months, too far along to start over, he said.

"If we were starting fresh two years ago - we could probably have done this," Webb said.

The high-rise project is planned to take up the entire block that is bordered by West Vine Street, South Limestone, West Main Street and South Upper Street.

On Saturday at a community meeting at the Kentucky Theatre attended by about 400 people, CentrePointe was criticized as architecturally pedestrian and out of scale with Lexington's low-rise downtown.

Responding to Webb's turning thumbs down on the design competition, Gray said he was "disappointed" and was going to ask that they reconsider

seicer

April 1st, 2008, 05:02 AM

Eatery to be displaced finds new home (http://www.kentucky.com/181/story/362645.html)
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, March 30, 2008

Mia's restaurant, located in a downtown block designated for demolition, has found a new home just a few blocks away at 127 North Limestone, former home of Annabelle's restaurant.

Owners Mia Mobelini and Maribeth Tolson said they have an agreement with the owners of the building. "Their lawyer has been out of town. We'll work out the paperwork tonight or in the morning," Mobelini said Monday.

The two have operated Mia's at 120 South Upper Street for nine years, in a building owned by businessman Joe Rosenberg. "We've had a great relationship with Joe," Tolson said. "He's been a good landlord. He gave us an opportunity when we were young and unproven."

It is on the block planned to become the CentrePointe hotel-condo development.

Their new location, across from the Fayette County courthouses, is about the same size as their present location, "but with a bigger, more beautiful kitchen," Tolson said. "It is state-of-the-art."

Hours will be expanded to serve lunch, in addition to dinner, plus brunch on Saturdays and Sundays. Tolson said it would take at least a month to get a new liquor license. She anticipates moving in about eight weeks.

seicer

April 1st, 2008, 05:08 AM

Where do you think the Farmers Market could relocate to, if it doesn't stick around in the block by Centrepointe? That's a huge draw and a big plus for many downtown residents, and I would prefer to see it stick to somewhere central and not move out by Rupp.

cartomanlex

April 1st, 2008, 06:28 AM

I don't see why it couldn't go on Short St. near Cheapside. It seems like it would be just like the old court days market. Or why not take the old Courthouse Square area?

TheDame

April 1st, 2008, 09:48 AM

Oh I can't even wait to start diving into Dudley's statement.

Here's a start....

He compares the debate that's happening now to the discussion over what color the facade of Victorian Square should have been. I'm not exaggerating. This makes me physically ill.

Honestly, I don't think it's possible in this forum for me to write a WTF large enough to fully justify Dudley's asinine comparison. I don't care what you think about this issue; You should at least realize that it matters more than the color of a building 20 years ago.

I'm beginning to wonder why I should even continue to bother with Lexington.

gt7834a

April 1st, 2008, 04:28 PM

I would think in the park in front of the new courthouses would make a great place. It has plenty of paved area to set up in plus green space that is attractive. It could stretch over into Pheonix Park also. There are several restaurants along there that could set up take away so that more people would come down to eat as well as shop. A lot of Farmer's Markets that I have been to in other cities have as much prepared take away as they do produce and people sit in the grass and eat brunch. This would be a great spot for that with the benches and grass in the courthouse block and all the tables and benches in Pheonix Park. That block is much more attractive than Vine. The old courthouse would also make a very good place. They can easily close Cheapside since it doesn't go anywhere and then circle the old courthouse. I like the idea of it being along Main St. There is something about a big Farmer's Market that screams Main St to me. The Farmer's Market will survive and frankly I like the two locations I just proposed as well or better than Vine anyway.That said, there is no reason the Farmers Market could not stay where it is. They would only lose the two proposed driveways into the hotel. Obviously they couldn't stay there during construction but they could easily return there. Even during construction they would have several blocks they could use. They could stretch down to the Trade center/Radisson block if they need more space.

As to Dudley's comment about the colors at Victorian Sq. I think he was just trying to say that you can't please everyone. Obviously it was hyperbole. I don't think he believes that talking about saving the buildings is the same as picking colors, just that there will always be opposition no matter the project. The way it looks I think it is time to go the table and try to negotiate the best project possible and to get any design issues worked out because it looks like this thing is going to move forward.

BTW, I think the convention center is going to be a big reason this thing gets approved, if it does. They have been pushing for more rooms downtown. Since they have expanded their space they have the ability to have larger conventions but people want hotel space in walking distance and right now there simply are not enough. We have 2 hotels downtown, which is no where near enough for a major convention. Conventions bring a lot of people and money to the city/downtown so they have alot of pull in local government. Plus the city owns the convention center so they have a vested interest in its success.

TheDame

April 1st, 2008, 06:13 PM

Found this info on Tom Eblen's blog......I say someone should take Dudley up on his offer to sell his buildings at cost.

All of this info is from the Fayette County Property Valuation Administrator
http://www.fayettepva.com/Main/Home.aspx

Rite Aid Building
100 W. Main St.
Owner - Centrepointe LLC
Purchased - $216,000 in 11/06

Woolworth Parking Lot
106 W. Main St.
Owner - JOESONS INC KEN REALTY INC ET AL
Purchased - $160,000 in 10/04

Parking Lot
126 W. Main St.
Owner - Town & Country Rentals Inc (Address is 126 S. Upper / Joe Rosenberg)
Purchased - $1,000,000 in 10/04

Empty Storefronts (formerly House of Mercy)
136 W. Main St.
Owner - TOWN & COUNTRY RENTALS INC (Address is 126 S. Upper / Joe Rosenberg)
Additional Owners - Bradley Guy TTEE, Bradley Whitney TTEE
Purchased - $425,000 in 04/02

Club 141
140 W. Main St.
Owner - TOWN & COUNTRY RENTAL INC (Address is 126 S. Upper / Joe Rosenberg)
Purchased - $162,500 in 12/99

Club 141
146 W. Main St.
Owner - TOWN & COUNTRY RENTAL INC
Purchased - $162,499 in 4/02
Value jumped from $162,500 to $460,400 in 2007

Mad Hatter
152 W. Main St.
Owner - CENTREPOINTE LLC
Purchased - $0 in 11/07
Value jumped from $165,000 to $190,000 in 2007

The Dame
156 W. Main St.
Owner - Joe Rosenberg
Purchased - $200,000 in 8/84
Value jumped from $277,400 to $450,000 in 2007

Busters
164 W. Main St.
Owner - Town & Country Rentals
Purchased - $160,000 in 12/80
Value jumped from $225,000 to $302,400 in 2007

Mia’s
116 S. Upper St.
Owner - Joesons Inc
Purchased - ? (Unknown)
Value jumped from $174,200 to $322,800 in 2007

Mia’s
122 S. Upper St.
Owner - Joesons Inc
Purchased - ? (Unknown)
Value jumped from $72,000 to $108,000 in 2007

Joe Rosenberg’s
128 S. Upper St.
Owner - Joe Rosenberg
Purchased - $200,000 in 5/83
Value jumped from $293,800 to $367,200 in 2007

Triple Crown Lounge
119 S. Limestone
Owner - Gordon Cummins
Purchased - $175,000 in 10/96

Triple Crown Lounge
117 S. Limestone
Owner - Gordon Cummins
Purchased - $25,000 in 2/97

Formerly Sam’s Hot Dog Stand
111 S. Limestone
Owner - Centrepointe LLC
Purchased - $165,000 in 4/06
Value jumped from $80,000 to $165,000 in 2007.

Formerly some sort of tailor’s shop
109 S. Limestone
Owner - Centrepointe LLC
Purchased - $164,000 in 4/06
Value jumped from $80,000 to $164,000 in 2007.

seicer

April 1st, 2008, 06:37 PM

Well, here is what I've seen done in other cities.

Charleston, WV has the Capitol Market. Heavily marketed and located in the downtown region, it is a restored freight depot that has been gutted. Inside are numerous vendors and restaurants, including vegetable and fish markets. It is open year-round. Outside, there are covered canopies (train canopies) where a farmers market operates during the warmer months.

Ashland, KY has a market in a parking lot near the riverfront, but is moving to the freight depot soon. 1/4 of the depot was restored a few years ago as a transit terminal (Amtrak, Greyhound, city bus stop), and the other 3/4 was recently restored to be used as an indoor market -- the first in Kentucky. It is designed to be similar on a smaller scale to Capitol Market in Charleston. It will tie in nicely with their riverfront project. It will also double as a farmers market.

Ironton, OH is planning for an expanded farmers market. The former NW depot was recently restored into a restaurant. Adjacent to this is a very large brick-paved lot that is underutilized. Plans call for a covered canopy that extends for the length of the lot and to serve as a farmers market and for other events.

Lexington could do a lot here. Granted we do not have a depot to restore as an inviting market, or a railroad through downtown, but we can be creative. I envisioned closing Cheapside, restoring the Courthouse plaza (moving most of the memorials throughout the downtown instead of stacking them all at the plaza -- the clutter was mentioned in the H-L a while back actually). Install covered canopies along the center of a renewed pedestrian-only Cheapside. That, or use one of the surface lots along Short (or maybe Short and Limestone) as a new farmers market.

gt7834a

April 1st, 2008, 07:05 PM

Those are not the Webbs land costs, those are, for the most part, Rosenburgs land costs. Centerpoint is buying most of the land from Rosenburg. The ones they are not, namely The Mad Hatter and Tripple Crown Lounge sold for $850,000 and $1.5 million respectively. I imagine most of the land costs are more similar to those than what you have listed. You cannot buy a space as small as the Mad Hatter for 850,000 and keep it there. It would never, ever cash flow.

cartomanlex

April 1st, 2008, 08:02 PM

The Dame
156 W. Main St.
Owner - Joe Rosenberg
Purchased - $200,000 in 8/84
Value jumped from $277,400 to $450,000 in 2007

To what do attribute the increase in this property's value? It is certainly not the opening of the Dame nor its success. Nor is it the quality of the surrounding structures. And, if they had left the money in the bank, the interest would be more than that.

The total of your figures is just under $4.4 million. That would put this block as very underutilized as a tax base.

seicer

April 2nd, 2008, 12:26 AM

Review board will call for delay in demolition (http://www.kentucky.com/181/story/363516.html)
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, April 1, 2008

The Courthouse Area Design Review Board staff report on Wednesday will recommend postponing demolition of buildings in the Woolworth block that are in the Courthouse Area Design Overlay Zone, and also postponing authorization for new construction.

A $250 million hotel and residential condominium development called CentrePointe has been proposed for a block on Main Street that lies partially within the Courthouse Area.

The Design Review Board must grant permission before buildings in that zone may be razed. It also has authority to approve the design of new construction.

Applications to demolish four buildings on the Limestone side of the block have been filed with the city's Building Inspection office. However, those buildings are not in the Design Overlay Zone. Neither are buildings on the Upper Street side of the block including the Joe Rosenberg jewelry store, built in 1826 and said by preservationists to be the oldest building in continuous operation in downtwon Lexington.

The report states that the CentrePointe application "does not demonstrate the full economic potential of the existing structures, if each were rehabilitated and utilized to its highest and best use."

The applicant is seeking permission to demolish existing buildings in the overlay zone and to construct a 356-story building on the property.

The CentrePointe application will be heard at 2 p.m. on Wednesday in Urban County Council Chambers in the Government Center on Main Street. After a public hearing, the board will vote.

Board members are Steve Kelly, Central Bank; Michael Meuser with Miller, Griffin & Marks PSC; Bill Henkel, an owner of Henkel-Denmark Inc.; Larry Hitchner with Merit Furniture; and Anthony Wright, the city's economic development director.

Bill Van Pelt is the staff design review officer.

TheDame

April 2nd, 2008, 12:59 AM

April fools joke? ^^

bigwilley

April 2nd, 2008, 01:05 AM

Seicer if it's gonna be an april fools joke, at least make it a reasonable 60 stories lol

seicer

April 2nd, 2008, 01:13 AM

Check the article yourself :D

Just rechecked. It was modified. *SIGH*

g-man430

April 2nd, 2008, 01:14 AM

Good god. It's going to be taller than Burj Dubai. Somebody call CNN. :lol:

cartomanlex

April 2nd, 2008, 02:22 AM

bigwilley

April 2nd, 2008, 02:29 AM

Good god. It's going to be taller than Burj Dubai. Somebody call CNN. :lol:

Already tooken care of, it has a thread in the supertall section!!!!
Is this the render?
http://www.dominic-harman.com/scienceF_pics/SF30Front.jpg

:lol::lol::lol:

madtony8k

April 2nd, 2008, 04:18 AM

The vice mayor plows ahead with it design competition

http://tomeblen.wordpress.com/

If Dudley Webb has said that they will not change their design and will not build the competition winner, what will the prize be if someone enters? It will cost about $100,000 and rewards with nothing.

That is just ridiculous. Webb said he doesn't want a competition. He said that the hotel has hired it's own architects, and there has been over 18 months of planning already into this. Webb owns the property, and Webb is developing it. The city is really struggling on this, but it seems like it's just too late to start over on the design.

cartomanlex

April 2nd, 2008, 04:37 AM

I see this as a political ploy. Something to look like he's getting things done. To show that the people have a voice. Although he knows how thing are done and has done them himself, I think this is to say that he's connected with the people.

No one has yet shown why this project should not go forward, only that they think that they should have a voice in the matter. No one here has a dime invested in this block, or even in the immediate area. That, I think, is representation without taxation

seicer

April 2nd, 2008, 05:11 AM

No one _can_ invest a dime in the block. Not while Rosenburgs' held back on improvements for years. Have you talked to the owners of Mia's? The roof was needing replacing five years ago. The general conditions of the building were very poor, yet no improvements were ever done. And Busters'? They had proposed restoring the facade years ago, with the owner's help. And removing that steel outpost. And The Dame? Well, you pretty much know the story.

When a building has deteriorated to a point due to an owner's neglect, then the developer can claim "demolition due to deterioration." As someone who works with the Bluegrass Trust for Historic Preservation, I cannot count the number of times we nearly lost properties due to that lame excuse. Owners who had plenty of money that refused to invest in the property, so that they could reap in the insurance money.

Remember Waverly Hills in Louisville? The previous owner attempted to cause a collapse on the southern fringe of the property, an excuse to state that the former hospital was severely deteriorated and that it needed immediate tear-down. The new owners are ... saving and actually restoring the former hospital.

Remember that one building across the street from the new courthouse on Limestone (I can't remember the name). The former owner attempted to have it demolished due to its condemnation and neglect. This obviously failed and it is being restored.

Many reasons have been stated why this project should _not_ go forward; but if you turn a deaf ear towards it, and only hear the positives of the project, then you really are hearing just one-side.

I will say this: the design competition is a bit late in the game. But there has been less discussion and discourse about Centrepointe than any other project that I have attended. 500's on the Main had many public hearings before a final design was even released. Same with Kimball Square, Main and Rose and CenterCourt. To be thrown this 40 (now 35) story building and saying that "it should be built before the 2010 games" is a little... abrupt.

cartomanlex

April 2nd, 2008, 03:11 PM

Many reasons have been stated why this project should _not_ go forward; but if you turn a deaf ear towards it, and only hear the positives of the project, then you really are hearing just one-side.

I will say this: the design competition is a bit late in the game. But there has been less discussion and discourse about Centrepointe than any other project that I have attended.

The many "stated" reasons are just statements and not real facts. There has been no proof in these reasons. I hear both sides, actually I hear both sides more now that I'm older. We can't "hold the line" on outward growth and "hold the line" on downtown upward growth and "hold the line" on downtown residential incursions and expect real growth to occur by letting the absorption fairy take care of it.

Much of these discussions and discourse that you missed out on were held by those who understand the needs of city well before the general populace and moved to do something, rather than be blamed for waiting too long to act. As in highway design, if you wait for the people to demand the road, then the window of opportunity for good efficient design has been closed for a while.

seicer

April 2nd, 2008, 03:42 PM

seicer

April 2nd, 2008, 04:33 PM

Richard Moe is president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Historic buildings belong downtown (http://www.kentucky.com/589/story/363895.html)
Link exists between local economies and historic preservation
By Richard Moe, Herald-Leader, April 2, 2008

The Lexington Courthouse Area Design Review Board today will consider the proposed CentrePointe development. The hearing can be viewed on GTV3 at 2 p.m. The board's decision will mark an important watershed in determining the future of downtown.

Like many cities throughout the nation, Lexington was hit hard by the suburban flight and destructive urban renewal programs of the 1960s. Entire blocks of character-defining buildings were abandoned or razed, and the pedestrian focus of the traditional downtown was marginalized in favor of the automobile.

Now, in a welcome turnaround, Lexington is rediscovering the value of its urban core and is actively working to revitalize it. Having learned the folly of trying to restore downtown by destroying it, the city now has a great opportunity to use historic preservation as a tool for bringing new vitality to the heart of the community.

There is plenty of evidence that this approach works. The Main Street program founded by the National Trust for Historic Preservation over 30 years ago has won acclaim for its success in fostering sustainable revitalization. More than 90 communities in Kentucky are actively participating in the Main Street program.

In 2006 alone, using historic preservation as the keystone of their revitalization efforts, these communities saw $292 million in investment and a net gain of more than 4,500 new jobs. Since Kentucky's involvement with the Main Street program began in 1987, more than $2 billion has been invested in downtowns all over the Commonwealth.

This story is repeated from coast to coast: Understanding that economic revitalization and historic preservation are closely linked, small towns and big cities everywhere have enhanced their downtown environment by saving and reusing the historic buildings that distinguish a traditional central business district from the typical suburban shopping mall.

Sensitive new development can play an important role in revitalization, but massive, out-of-scale projects that promise a quick fix rarely deliver on that promise. In fact, such projects can actually deter revitalization by destroying the distinctive character that people seek out and enjoy in older communities everywhere.

Ten of the buildings slated for demolition by the CentrePointe development are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, and two others have been determined eligible for listing. Besides being irreplaceable links with Lexington's heritage, these buildings are valuable assets that have demonstrated their durability -- some of them have already lasted longer than much new construction -- and still have plenty of good use left in them.

Instead of wasting them, the city should capitalize on them. Instead of flattening them, the city should reuse them -- an action that would have important environmental benefits, since it would avoid wasting all the energy and materials that went into their construction and avoid adding tons of demolition debris to already-crowded landfills.

The National Trust joins the Blue Grass Trust, Preservation Kentucky and Preserve Lexington in calling for the city to take a careful look at the proposed development in light of the experience of other cities and, equally important, in light of the Courthouse Area Design Review Overlay Zone guidelines, which "reflect the city's goals to promote economic development, enhance the image of the area and reuse its historic resources."

We urge the Courthouse Area Design Review Board to ask for a new design that adheres to its guidelines. No one is seeking to stifle growth or progress, or to freeze time and turn downtown Lexington into a museum. We all want an urban center that is lively, attractive and economically viable -- but you don't make a place better by destroying what makes it special.

Richard Moe is president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

cartomanlex

April 2nd, 2008, 05:27 PM

Fact: Historical properties will be lost.
Fact: The Dame, a very popular entertainment venue, will be lost.
Fact: One of Lexington's nightlife draws will be lost.
Fact: Centrepointe does not need to be 35-stories to be financially successful. The property valuations alone, as posted earlier, are statement to that. Unless of course, the values have increased ten-fold in the past few months. Similar projects in the downtown have been completed on a much smaller scale and have been financially successful.
Fact: There are many who are opposed to the project, and many who are supportive of the project. A Preserve Lexington presentation resulted in an overflowing, rather emotional crowd.
Fact: Former Vice Mayor Gray, owner of Gray Construction, is against the project's conception. And our current mayor, Newberry, has stated that he is "cautious" regarding Centrepointe.
Fact: Centrepointe will add more tax base to a declined block. Remember that only up until a few months ago, the block, sans the parking lot and two of the small buildings along Limestone, was completely filled. But a 35-story tower will obviously have more tax value than a mix of 2- and 3-story structures.
Fact: A hotel chain is interested in Centrepointe.
Fact: The downtown condominium market is sagging, much like the housing market overall. Many unsold units at other LRC properties and other new developments have become lease units. Let's hope that 2010 proves to be a better year for the market.
So, which of these facts prove that the Centerpointe project should not go forward?
Not your first one, historic buildings were lost for the Courthouse Plaza and I hear no one cite those losses.
Not your second, The Dame's future has not been decided.
Not your third, it's the same as the second.
Not your fourth, you are comparing the success of this one to 22 year old projects.
Not your fifth, pros and cons have been expressed on every project downtown for the last 40 years.
Not your sixth, the project has been conceived and the Vice Mayor wishes to salve the peoples fears with a competition. That is quite different than being against it.
Not your seventh, an increase in property taxes will help the State and schools and an increase in employment taxes will help the city's bottom line. The value of this building will raise the value of all the surrounding buildings. This would say that it should go forward.
Not your eighth, another hotel will protect our recent investment in the expansion of The Lexington Center and the proposed new arena.
Not your ninth, the entire housing market is sagging but the homebuilders are not stopping new home construction nor the development of new suburbs. Those plans continue at a slower pace.

So how does this hurt downtown in the long run?

seicer

April 2nd, 2008, 05:42 PM

Actually, the last few points were not against Centrepointe but were just thrown out there as facts. Buildings can be denied on more than a purely economic reason -- which was my point. Sentiment towards the buildings is taken into account, along with the historical nature of the properties and their inclusion (10/14) on the NHR. Public comments are weighed in, among many other factors. Those reasons alone are some that have been voiced and stated many times as to why it should not go forward in the minds of some -- perfectly valid arguments that are not based solely upon numbers or financial data.

seicer

April 2nd, 2008, 11:46 PM

Anyone attend the meeting?

CentrePointe developers ask for 60-day postponement (http://www.kentucky.com/254/story/364519.html)
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, April 2, 2008

In a surprise move, developers of the proposed CentrePointe project took the initiative and asked the Courthouse Area Design Review Board on Wednesday for a 60-day postponement to have their case heard.

Developer Dudley Webb said that would give time for "us to tell our side of the story" and to get public input on the project.

The Design Review Board staff report Ð scheduled to be presented at the meeting Ð was going to recommend postponing the developers' request to demolish historic buildings on the block, clearing the way for a $250 million hotel and condominium project.

Webb said in this 60-day cooling-off period, he would not demolish any buildings on the block. And he hopes to schedule a public meeting at the Kentucky Theatre with the project's architect to answer questions and talk about "what can and cannot be done" in altering the design of the 35-story building.

The five-member Design Review Board agreed to Webb's request, as did the attorney for Preserve Lexington, a group seeking to have the project design modified to incorporate some or all of the 14 historic buildings on the block.

Webb said it would also provide time to talk about where to locate the Farmers Market and the entertainment venues in the block.

He said ground could still be broken for the project in September, and while 2010 is a "target" date for the project, having it completed in time for the 2010 FEI Alltech World Equestrian Games was not driving the project.

cartomanlex

April 3rd, 2008, 02:53 AM

The presentation given by the lead architect, about how they tried to follow the guidelines of the Court House Design Board, sure answered some questions. They also showed some more renderings showing scenes from street level.

superflymike

April 3rd, 2008, 04:25 AM

I doubt this project will get approved without Jim Gray on board. I think most people will be looking at him for answers since hes in the construction business

seicer

April 3rd, 2008, 04:43 AM

Translation: There was much more opposition than we had anticipated. As if packing the Kentucky Theater wasn't enough...

Someone did ask about the LEED. The architect is aiming for Gold certification apparently, and has pushed for LEED certification on other projects. See also --
http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220

TheDame

April 3rd, 2008, 12:04 PM

cartomanlex

April 3rd, 2008, 03:50 PM

The renderings they showed

http://tomeblen.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/upper-and-main.jpg

http://tomeblen.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/upper-and-vine.jpg

http://tomeblen.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/main-at-midblock.jpg

seicer

April 3rd, 2008, 04:11 PM

CentrePointe developers ask to postpone review (http://www.kentucky.com/779/story/364931.html)
REQUEST AVERTS POTENTIAL CONFRONTATIONS
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, April 3, 2008

In a surprise move, developers of the proposed $250 million CentrePointe project took the initiative and asked the Courthouse Area Design Review Board on Wednesday for a 60-day postponement before having their case heard.

The agreement to postpone had been hastily reached two hours earlier in a meeting with developers Dudley Webb, his nephew Woodford Webb, their attorney Darby Turner, businessman Joe Rosenberg, Vice Mayor Jim Gray and via telephone, Hayward Wilkirson, representing Preserve Lexington.

This action headed off a potentially heated public meeting in the Urban County Council chambers packed mostly with opponents of the hotel-condominium project.

It also averted confrontation with the Design Review Board, whose staff report recommended that the CentrePointe application be postponed because it was incomplete. Specifically, it did not show the economic potential of the existing historic buildings if they were restored and used for their "highest and best use."

The project can't proceed without approval of the board.

Dudley Webb said the 60 days will "give us time to tell our side of the story" and talk about relocating the Farmers Market and entertainment venues that will be displaced by the project, which will take up an entire block.

During this cooling-off period, no buildings on the block will be demolished, even the four that have demolition permits pending with the city's Division of Building Inspection.

Webb plans to call a public meeting at the Kentucky Theatre with CentrePointe architects and engineers to answer questions about "what can and cannot be done" in changing the design of the 35-story building, and to get public input on aesthetics such as window design and shape of the tower.

Webb attended a meeting on Saturday at the Kentucky Theatre that was filled with people opposed to the CentrePointe project as it is designed.

Substantive changes to the building's design are not what Webb says he has in mind.

Building height and mass will not change, he said, and the design will not be altered to include any historic buildings.

Vocal opponents to the high-rise have told him that height -- it would be one of the tallest buildings in the city -- is not an issue, Webb said, "which has been reassuring to me."

He said most objections are to the scale and appearance of the building at street level.

As for including any of the 14 historic buildings on the block, "It's impossible," he said. "You can restore the buildings, which is not economically feasible, but you can't preserve the buildings and build a high-rise there. Nor can you preserve the fa�ades and build a high-rise there."

He said "those are the two options open for the community, and the community needs to decide. We have gone as far as we can. At some point, the community has to decide which it wants."

Gray said he was "really grateful Dudley is willing to talk, but that talk has to include preservation of some of the historic fabric on this block. Otherwise, I'm not sure what we're talking about."

Wilkirson said: "If we can't talk about inclusion of some of the historic architecture on the block, there's not a lot of point to talking."

Architect for the project Jim Culpepper with the Atlanta firm of Culpepper, McAuliffe and Meaders was in town ready to make the case before the Design Review Board for razing the old buildings and presenting an architectural design for CentrePointe.

When postponement cut the hearing short, the audience was invited to see Culpepper's presentation showing an architectural rendering of what CentrePointe would look like in the context of existing buildings on Main Street.

Webb, who has developed many projects in Kentucky, including Lexington Green, the Financial Center and Festival Market in Lexington, said he was going about this project "with a little bit more patience than we would have in the old days."

"We care about what people think. They're are neighbors, our friends, our families," he said.

cartomanlex

April 3rd, 2008, 04:48 PM

This action headed off a potentially heated public meeting in the Urban County Council chambers packed mostly with opponents of the hotel-condominium project.

I would have to disagree with Ms. Fortune on this statement. I attended this meeting and neither the proponents nor the opponents were allowed to identify themselves. Ms. Fortune appeared to arrive late and leave before the meeting ended and unless she is a mind reader, I don't see how she could know the mindset of all the attendees. This is either an opinion presented as fact or an editors comment to sell newspapers, which the H-L has done before.

The crowd was very civil, and a majority of those I talked to were supportive of the plan but concerned about the scale.

seicer

April 3rd, 2008, 05:12 PM

Likewise, I've heard different (outside of the H-L). I had five friends who attended the meeting (but don't post here at SSP unfortunately) who stated that there was "significant" opposition present at the meeting; they had many friends who had also attended the meeting who were also opposed to the current plan.

It's going to be interesting to see what the Webb's do with this. They are facing a lot of opposition and are being fired upon by all sides for their failure with Festival Market (remember what was once on that site?), and for their other projects. They have pretty much faced the facts that they cannot railroad this project through, as they apparently did in the 1980s (pretty much admitting to that in the quote).

seicer

April 3rd, 2008, 11:08 PM

With reference to Mr. Webb’s open letter of March 31, 2008, the Blue Grass Trust for Historic Preservation submits these few comments:

The Blue Grass Trust is an organization with a broad base of members which strives to be true to its mission of protecting and promoting the special historic places in our community. We believe we have fulfilled our mission on numerous occasions over our fifty year history and places and structures like Henry Clay’s Law Office, the Dudley House, Shakertown, the Mary Todd Lincoln House and the Adam Rankin House are but a few examples of our work. And, as the owners of the Hunt-Morgan House, the Pope Villa and its ongoing renovation, and the adjacent Endicott House, we too, as Mr. Webb would say, “have skin in the game.”

At one time, each of these structures that the Blue Grass Trust has helped to preserve was, in Mr. Webb’s vernacular “old” and “bad” and deemed not worthy of saving by many in this community. Were they correct?

The Blue Grass Trust does not promote the protection and preservation of a building just because of its age. We support protecting most of the Dame block structures because they are historic and worthy of preservation. The Design Review Officer of the Courthouse Area Design Review Board has already found as a matter of fact that the structures on that portion of the Dame block that is located within the Courthouse Overlay Area contribute to the character of the area and that their demolition will adversely affect the character of the area.

Mr. Webb twice instructs the Blue Grass Trust to “pick their battles and focus on the ones that make sense” and not be “constantly distracted by skirmishes that can’t or shouldn’t be won.”

The Blue Grass Trust does not view itself as a warrior engaged in battles or skirmishes. Our position is a very simple one – follow the rules. We are asking the duly appointed members of the Courthouse Area Design Review Board and the Planning Commission to apply the existing law and guidelines that the LFUCG has enacted and determine whether the historic buildings on the Dame block should be preserved or whether everything on that block should be destroyed.

The Blue Grass Trust is always willing to meet with Mr. Webb and all interested parties to discuss this matter. Thank you for giving the Blue Grass Trust an opportunity to respond.

With best regards,

Julie Good

Executive Director

cartomanlex

April 4th, 2008, 12:06 AM

The Blue Grass Trust is a fine organization which does an admirable job for a basically volunteer group that depends on donations to do anything. They have rescued some very beautiful buildings, but I have yet to see them do anything except display them for more donations. Were they to attempt to rescue the Dame building alone, they don't have the funds to purchase the property and them restore it, not to mention all the other structures on the block. The current value of the property is about $2 million with the building and at least twice that without. If the Pope house is any indication of their restoration ability, the they do a beautiful job but they are slooooow. Where would the Dame perform while they are doing the work?

In regard to Preserve Lexington,why didn't they do anything when they were told that "if the rumors were true, then the design phase is in progress now". they sat back and waited for the announcement to come. out. Being in reactionary mode is a bad position to advance from.

seicer

April 4th, 2008, 12:09 AM

I don't know if it was posted or not, but the National Trust for Historic Preservation also sounded off in opposition to the project.

madtony8k

April 4th, 2008, 02:30 AM

Debate aside.. The street level rederings are goreous. Thanks for sharing the pics cartomanlex.

TheDame

April 4th, 2008, 02:40 AM

Debate aside.. The street level rederings are goreous. Thanks for sharing the pics cartomanlex.

Goreous indeed.

madtony8k

April 4th, 2008, 03:02 AM

Goreous indeed.
oops.. gorgeous

you got me. haha

seicer

April 4th, 2008, 04:35 AM

Here are my thoughts on the renderings, on the basis that the block is demolished:

http://tomeblen.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/upper-and-main.jpg
^ That doesn't appear to be all that awful. There is no large setback and the building fronts the street. The use of brick on the first level is a nice decorative touch, and the large windows are more inviting than the glass fortress that is the Festival Market. Hopefully these won't be entirely reflective. I also like the Upper/Main corner, however, I would like to see lighter glass paneling used.

http://tomeblen.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/upper-and-vine.jpg
^ Varying designs along Vine and Upper. What I don't see here is the utility/service entrance, which will probably never be shown in a rendering. It's "obscured" by the tree in the foreground. You also cannot make out the auto-loop, which I disfavor.

http://tomeblen.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/main-at-midblock.jpg
^ The design of the facade resembles much of what was put in some design (wish list) guidebook published by the Lexington DDA (the name escapes me). There is a varying setback and rather diverse streetscape design, and I like the fourth floor balconies. I'll echo the need for lighter glass and accessories -- perhaps use stainless steel instead of something painted black, and revise the canopy to be more... bright.

cartomanlex

April 4th, 2008, 08:22 PM

Business Lexington (http://www.bizlex.com/1sectionbody.lasso?-token.folder=activefiles&-token.section=11240.113117&-token.esecsource=11240.113117)
http://www.bizlex.com/images/z.gifCentrePointe:
An opportunity to link past, present and future
by Clyde Reynolds Carpenter (http://www.bizlex.com/1editorialtablebody.lasso?-token.searchtype=authorroutine&-token.lpsearchstring=Clyde%20Reynolds%20Carpenter&-nothing)

http://www.bizlex.com/images/z.gif April 05, 2008
Letter to Mayor Jim Newberry

As a long term member of the historic preservation community and the architectural profession in Kentucky, and as a resident of downtown Lexington, I am pleased to learn there will be new development that will infill the block on Main and Vine Streets, bounded by South Upper and South Limestone Streets. The current parking lot on this site certainly mars the appearance of our downtown environment. Therefore, it will be great to have a structure in that location that will fill in this "missing tooth" in downtown Lexington and reinforce the streetscape of our city

The design proposal I have seen as depicted in illustrations in the Herald Leader and on television calls for a central multistory tower flanked by low rise, four and five story buildings along the South Upper and South Limestone edges of this site. Although I welcome the redevelopment of this block, the design proposal raises two issues for me. First, the size and scale of the tower; and second, the destruction of the historic and architecturally significant buildings on this site. I share some of the concerns expressed by others about the magnitude and the scale of the tower relative to the architectural and urban design character of Lexington. I can support the concept of a tower but the manner in which it is designed requires great consideration and great design sensitivity. I am pleased to learn that the design of this project as presented is not the final version so that the designers of this project will have an opportunity to address the issues and concerns raised about the presence of this new structure in our downtown district.

I also share the concerns expressed by other individuals and groups about the impending demolition of existing structures on this site. The design proposal indicates that the redevelopment of this block will be total new construction with no plans to preserve any of its historic and architecturally important buildings. However, the concept of proposed low rise, four story elements flanking the tower provides a perfect opportunity to integrate these existing significant older buildings into this design proposal. These structures, which are part of the architectural history and heritage of our community, and which are three to four stories in height, could become part of these proposed low rise elements, joining with new construction to form a richly diverse yet unified urban streetscape that would be far more interesting than completely new building facades. If these buildings were to be so integrated, this would not only preserve these pieces of our community's architectural history but would also allow the present entertainment district, so important to the vitality of downtown, to continue to remain.

The successful integration of old and new structures can be found in many progressive cities, and, in particular, in our neighboring city of Louisville where thoughtful preservation and new development have joined forces to create a dynamic urban environment. The new Cobalt Venture's project, the Iron Quarter, retains historic buildings to maintain the historic streetscape in conjunction with a modern new steel and glass office structure. This is one of Louisville's several stellar examples of creative architectural and preservation design that preserves the old while accommodating the new. Another example of successful urban design in Louisville integrating the old and the new is the Humana Building. The newer Humana tower with its low rise base element successfully mediates and enjoins the older low rise structures on this street. Both of these projects illustrate ways in which infill can accommodate both old and new structures. The successful integration of old and new structures does require imagination, commitment and a desire to seek unique, not conventional, design solutions. Unfortunately, to some parties, it may seem easier to tear down historic buildings rather than to meet the challenges of imaginative and innovative architectural and preservation design. However, the leadership in our city should encourage and insist that these challenges be met in the interest of a vibrant downtown Lexington.

Our city has an opportunity to demonstrate how new and old, contemporary and historic structures can be united to create a dynamic and richly diverse urban environment. I would urge you to charge the developers of this new structure to integrate the historic structures that stand on South Upper Street and South Limestone Street into the design of this building. This can be done successfully and beautifully. This is a wonderful moment in the life of our city. We can have new buildings and we can preserve old buildings in a manner that enriches our city.

Clyde Reynolds Carpenter, FAIA, Architect

cartomanlex

April 4th, 2008, 08:38 PM

Business Lexington (http://www.bizlex.com/1sectionbody.lasso?-token.folder=activefiles&-token.section=11240.113117&-token.esecsource=11240.113117)

Pro-Growth Vs. No Growth
CentrePointe revives age-old fight

By David Mohney (http://www.bizlex.com/1editorialtablebody.lasso?-token.searchtype=authorroutine&-token.lpsearchstring=David%20Mohney&-nothing)http://www.bizlex.com/images/z.gif April 05, 2008
Center Pointe, the new high-rise hotel and condominium project proposed for the Woolworth block in downtown Lexington, seemed to be pushing the community into a reprise of that familiar drama: pro-growth versus no growth, or a new vision of the city versus preserving Lexington just the way it is. It's been a familiar theme for a generation. And it's a theme that has provoked some of the most pitched battles among members of the community, played out in the pages of the newspaper, the voices of talk radio, and ultimately, city council's chambers.

But if passions would run high in these arguments, there was also a surreal element to them as well. Remember the debate of whether or not to close Short Street for a block to make a giant reflecting pool at the center of an enlarged Courthouse Square? The project was to be a gift to the city from the Triangle Foundation, just as that group had built Triangle Park and Thoroughbred Park at either end of downtown. After two months of public meetings, articles, and many heated opinions, the decision was made to say, "Thanks but no thanks," to the Triangle Foundation and keep Short Street open. Case closed, right?

Not at all. Within a week after deciding to keep Short Street open, the city closed it – to build the new courthouses. For almost four years, the street was closed – and nobody said a word.The debate about closing the small section of Vine Street between Triangle Park and the Civic Center raised the public temperature eve higher. (Full disclosure: the Vine Street design was part of a larger downtown master plan initiated by the UK College of Design while I was dean, to fill the void that existed at the time of any kind of vision for downtown.) Council initially approved the plan, and then reversed their approval after the debate became heated. Vine Street stayed open. Yet within the last month, both civic and business leaders have made the point that that section of Vine Street needs to be closed soon, at least before the World Equestrian Games arrive in 2010. And the reaction? Nary a peep this time.

So I hope you can understand my opinion that even more than resolving these issues about the design of the city, what Lexington really liked was the argument over them. Forget this sense of a genteel community with good southern manners; what Lexington wanted was a fight!

And Centerpointe initially seemed to be falling into the same dynamic: a strong-willed developer with a soaring new vision of the future versus the preservation community determined to save ten historic buildings on the site, along with those people supporting a nascent and fragile entertainment district that would be eliminated by the project. Lots of newspaper headlines, lots of radio commentary, and a blizzard of email. All pointing to a "Wake Up Lexington!" rally held on Saturday, March 29, at the Kentucky Theater, organized by Preserve Lexington. I was fully expecting the same old dynamic to emerge, a strong argument between different sides, with no attempt to find any kind of compromise. And no matter who won, sore feelings that would negatively affect building civic capital at a moment when Lexington truly needed some.

But something else happened, something wonderful. The organizers of Preserve Lexington made it very clear from the beginning of their program, at a standing room only crowd in the State Theater, that this was not about engaging in a fight for the sake of fighting. It was about trying to figure out how to make the Center Pointe project move forward, but in a way that made it a more vital part of the city, not just for its future, but for honoring its past as well. To his credit, the developer attended the meeting; to their credit, Preserve Lexington honored his presence. There was a very conscious intention not to fall back into divisive positions but to talk about shared interests. And that was a remarkable and welcome change from the past.

Obviously, there is still a long way to go before anything is built on the Woolworth block, especially in an economic climate as uncertain as this time. But there seems to be genuine willingness to try and make the Center Pointe project better for the community. And that involves components of Lexington's urban life, both from the past as well as the present, that really aren't part of Center Pointe's brief, like finding a way to preserve historic structures to supporting, even expanding, a fragile entertainment district. A lot of people are working hard to find a way to make this a better project for all Lexingtonians. Let's hope not only that they succeed, but also that this is a harbinger of a new civic discourse. Just maybe that sense of fighting for fighting's sake is over.

David Mohney is Dean Emeritus, University of Kentucky College of Design and chairman of the Downtown Development Authority's board of directors.

cartomanlex

April 4th, 2008, 11:45 PM

Within a week after deciding to keep Short Street open, the city closed it – to build the new courthouses. For almost four years, the street was closed – and nobody said a word.The debate about closing the small section of Vine Street between Triangle Park and the Civic Center raised the public temperature eve higher. (Full disclosure: the Vine Street design was part of a larger downtown master plan initiated by the UK College of Design while I was dean, to fill the void that existed at the time of any kind of vision for downtown.) Council initially approved the plan, and then reversed their approval after the debate became heated. Vine Street stayed open. Yet within the last month, both civic and business leaders have made the point that that section of Vine Street needs to be closed soon, at least before the World Equestrian Games arrive in 2010. And the reaction? Nary a peep this time.

This is not true, actually. In the latest edition that I have seen of Town Meeting, Marvin Jones and even Don Pratt have urged their readers to again protest this proposal in a "we've done it before--we can do it again" attitude that runs counter to Mr. Mohney's assertion. Maybe the mindset has not changed as much as he desires.

seicer

April 6th, 2008, 12:40 AM

:lol::lol::lol:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2054/2390097515_8ccf1c8219_o.jpg

There was another one in Buster's window for another band :cheers:

eweezerinc

April 6th, 2008, 12:41 AM

ahahahahahahaha!!!!!! YES
Stick it to the man Lexington!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Whosville

April 6th, 2008, 01:02 AM

This whole thing is really funny to me. Lexington gets a chance to build its skyline (and everything that goes with it, reputation, business climate, ...) and Lexington just can't get out of its own way.

Funny stuff Lexington. Funny stuff.

cartomanlex

April 6th, 2008, 03:53 AM

bigwilley

April 6th, 2008, 04:27 AM

LOL!!!!Those two hands giving the finger is hilarious. "Yeah, Lexington is building this project to destroy the culture and the city its self, the city is basically saying F*#! you citizens" Did you like my imitation :)

Ian604

April 6th, 2008, 05:01 AM

Cartoman, give me couple days and i'll get back to you.

seicer

April 6th, 2008, 05:19 AM

I would like to ask Seicer, The Dame, Ian064 or any one else; If you had the $250 million to invest in something, where in the downtown area would you build and what would you do to better Lexington? All options are open, anything, anywhere, renovation, demolition, even rerouting traffic patterns. Just prove that Lexington will be better in the end. More employment, more tax revenue, more downtown residents. Show me a better use of the $250 million.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

$250 million... I can only guess of a few dozen areas around central Lexington where $250 million can be spent that would attract thousands of jobs, residents... not that you would care.

Good afternoon Tom:

I read Hayward’s e-mail of yesterday, found it very conciliatory and thank him for it.

We felt that it embodied the spirit and good faith of the agreement to which we had all committed earlier in the week and that all involved are truly intent on trying to make this project the best that it can be. We are looking forward to sitting down with all interested parties during the coming weeks to try to reach intelligent compromises on these issues and concerns so that this project can move forward.

I don’t want to digress, but I also read several of the trailing comments from certain of your other readers that were about us and, in fairness, I feel that we need to correct some of the things that they said that simply aren’t accurate:

(1) First, as to Nonnie Muss, all I can is that we have not closed the door on new ideas for the development and are still inviting them so please send us yours. Nonnie, I think you also need to appreciate that two years ago, the City Tourism and Convention Bureau asked us to consider building a new Convention Hotel with more upscale hotel rooms so that Lexington can attract bigger and better conventions to our city. Why? In hopes that such visitors will use our new Civic Center that the City is obligated for, visit our tourism attractions, eat at our restaurants, enjoy our entertainment venues and to generally,spend their money while here. Why is this important? Because first and foremost, this project will create jobs, some 900 during construction and over 1,000 upon its completion.

Likewise, I would remind Nonnie that the latest Comprehensive Plan adopted by our City reflected a preference for going up so that we can achieve more concentrated residential and retail development in our downtown rather than growing out into our horse farms and further invading our green space. I think that few would argue that this was not the right decision. This is why this project and its timing is so appropriate, whether we do it or someone else does it for that matter.

(2) Secondly, as to “S’s”assertion that we somehow brought down Kentucky Central, this is simply not true either and the Court that tried these cases emphatically confirmed that. In fact, that Judge even went so far as to also rule that Kentucky Central and its attorneys owed us money rather than the reverse. Not that it matters anymore as these matters have long since been settled, but the fact is that nobody lost more money as a result of its unfortunate and unnecessary demise than did the Webb’s, The real tragedy here is that Kentucky Central was a great corporate citizen of Lexington that employed over 700 of its people and did more for downtown Lexington than will ever be known or imagined. Tragically, it is now gone forever and any reopening of old wounds and controversies are a waste of time and will not bring it back. All we can now do as a community is to move on and to hope that others will step up and try to continue and resume its good work.

(3) Thirdly, contrary to what “Scott” stated in his e-mail to you, neither I, nor any member of my family, nor The Webb Companies, has ever filed for bankruptcy and “Scott” needs to get his facts straight before publishing such libelous and slanderous remarks. I will assume that his was simply an unintentional “misstatement” and let it go at that.

(4) Next, as to “Miller’s” question about “why these frauds and charlatans were allowed back into town?”, I can tell you that it was because we never left. I have lived here since 1965 and I am not going anywhere and I am raising my family here in hopes that they will stay on as Lexingtonians as well. I will also assume that you too mis-spoke with your characterizations and I will let that go at that as well.

I would however also remind “Miller” that we have invested well over $300,000,000.00 into this community and are still one of its larger employers, property owners and taxpayers. As I said before, I don’t appreciate your insults and would remind you that we do not owe you, or anyone else, an apology for our projects or for what we have done with and for this community.

As to “Miller’s” other assertion that we have bankrupted contractors, etc, in this process, this isn’t true either. In fact, we would challenge “Miller” or anyone else to identify even one instance where this has happened. To the contrary, we still use hundreds of local contractors, sub-contractors and consultants who still depend on us to generate the business that helps them to meet their payrolls and feed their families. “Miller”, your comments are not only unfounded and untrue, but are those that have hindered the constructive dialogue that is now well underway. Enough said on that as well. If you want to discuss it further, I invite you to call me.

As to “Miller’s” comments about another “Webb Fiasco” called “The Festival Marketplace”, I would only remind him/her that this was yet another experimental development concept of the ’80’s that the Federal Government fostered and which most urban planners across America thought would save their downtown’s by drawing shoppers from the suburbs and outlying communities. Lexington was not the only City that joined in this experiment. Cities like New York with its South Street Seaport, Boston with its Faneuil Hall, Baltimore with its Inner Harbor, Norfolk with its Harborside, Toledo with its Portside, Cleveland with the Flats, Louisville with its Galleria, and hordes of other cities all thought that specialty retail would save their downtowns. Obviously, it didn’t quite work out as anticipated, but, in fairness, why doesn’t “Miller” dig deeper into this to find out why it didn’t work in Lexington?

I think that most of those who were tenants in our “Festival” will now tell you that such a project was then premature and that we first needed to have more accessible and affordable downtown parking, more housing and more full-time residents. The second problem with it was that it was only stand alone specialty retail without adjoining anchors. The third reason was that the then City Leadership suddenly and abruptly decided to give up the parking spaces in the Victorian Square Garage that served the merchants and customers of Victorian Square and the Festival, electing to instead give them to the jurors that were adjudging trials in the old Courthouse situated nearby. Then lastly, the “Festival’s” final death knoll came when even though it was still then 90% leased, the then Liquidator of KCL publicly called it and our downtown a “black hole”, threw out our tenants, turned off its lights and shut it down completely. Shortly thereafter, the project was sold at a more than bizarre Liquidator and Court Ordered Auction that netted us less than 5% of what it cost us to build it. This was the another story never really told, but so be that also.

Admittedly, we and Kentucky Central had by then spent a small fortune to try to make the “Festival Market” work, but for numerous reasons, it didn’t and we were sorry for that. At least we tried and fortunately, neither the City of Lexington or any of its other creditors lost any money on this prematurely aborted experiment. To the contrary, the City of Lexington made millions from it from it while The Webb Companies and Kentucky Central lost their respective investments in it. “Miller”, in regards to downtown retail, I would be curious as to how many times you have shopped downtown in the last year or how much you have spent with the merchants that are already down here during this time frame? Not a meaningful sum I am sure, but yet your criticize them and us for trying.

“Miller”, while we are on this subject, we also find that many others want to promote an “Entertainment District” for the downtown. We dare say that nobody believes that downtown should include an “Entertainment District” more than we do. In modern times, we were the first as well as the only ones that tried to establish a downtown restaurant-entertainment district in the decades of 1970’s,1980’s and 1990’s. Remember “The Upstart Crow”? “Postlewaite’s Tavern”? How about “Greenstreet’s”? “Oliver’s”? “Old Water Street”? “Morgan’s Cafe”? “The Rosebud”? Do you know who did them all? I can tell you - it was the Webb’s.

Also, who do you think brought “Deshea’s” downtown? Or “Bravo Pitino’s”? “Jay’s Seafood”, “Silks”, and others. Who orchestrated bringing “Breeding’s” to downtown. I can again proudly say, it was the Webb’s and we are as proud of these developments as we are those tenants who stepped up, paid the price and tried to help us make this happen. The shame is that these were wonderful establishments for which the timing was too early and all too many of them did not get the public’s support to help keep them afloat while our downtown was making its comeback. To those who again want to try to create and foster an “Entertainment District” in our downtown, all I can tell you is that even though you are a little late in getting here, we are with you and we welcome you on board since this is an idea whose time has finally come.

(5) “Riverrat”, you are right. Although I had a lot to say in my e-mail of last week, it could have been more concise and to the point. Such happens when you are being criticized for doing what you think is right and so be it. As to the distinguished Dean’s comments, I suspect he too got a little carried away and so be that also. You are also correct in that there is a fine line between priceless and worthless and we are trying to find it. I hope you will help in this process and I invite you to do so.

(6) To “A”, all I can say is that the City of Lexington, The Bluegrass Trust, Preserve Lexington and most other affected special interest groups have been aware of this proposed project for more than 18 months now. Interestingly enough, during this period, we have had numerous meetings with them to review our proposed plans for this block. Not once did any of these people voice their opposition to the project or express concerns about it until about a month ago when the imminent closing of The Dame was publicly announced. The good news is that during times since, arrangements have been made for these venues to locate elsewhere in the downtown and we were pleased to help in that effort. What more would you have us do?

(7) “Josie”, as we have said all along, this project is not being driven by the 2010 Games as absolutely nobody would invest $250,000,000.00 in downtown Lexington for a three week event. It would be nice to have it ready by then and this could still happen if we can get going, but if not, so be it. As to your statement that “the taxpayers/the City will be paying for the building of Centrepointe”, that isn’t true either as the project will be paid for by its owners. Under the TIF as proposed, the “lift” that will be created by this project and the new taxes that it will generate will amortize the cost of the bonds that will pay for the “public infrastructure” which the City would normally have paid for, but now have no responsibility for. Again, all we ask is that you please further investigate and evaluate our plan, but until you do so, please do not intentionally misstate what we have proposed.

(8) Finally, as to “S” who has referred to the current PVA assessments for the buildings in the block, I would suggest that you need to extrapolate from these assessments, the taxes that will be flowing from the block and compare them to the rentals that are now being generated to the owners from the tenants in the block. I think you will find that these properties hardly generate enough in rents to even pay these property taxes, let alone amounts that would be required to amortize the costs of bringing them up to current building codes, or further improving them, or even covering their maintenance cost and/or any generating any reasonable return on the investments in them by their owners. This is why we and our consultants have concluded that they are not economically viable for either restoration purposes or for incorporation into our proposed new buildings and we will be demonstrating this predicament to the appropriate parties with whom we will be meeting during the coming weeks.

Tom, once again, I have probably rambled on far too long with this, but I again felt that in fairness, both sides of this story need to be told and it takes a while when you have so many that are trying to tell it.

Thanks for listening,

Dudley Webb

Centrepointe, LLC

g-man430

April 6th, 2008, 05:26 AM

^^You expect me to read all of that? :rant: :uh: Is there a cliffs-notes version anywhere? You're getting a chipmunk for Christmas. :D

cartomanlex

April 6th, 2008, 05:43 AM

$250 million... I can only guess of a few dozen areas around central Lexington where $250 million can be spent that would attract thousands of jobs, residents... not that you would care.

What kind of a response is that? Ian wants to think about it, don't you? I could think of a few different blocks to do something, seeing as I'm in that field. What I'm asking is what would you do? Do you or don't you have something positive to contribute?

seicer

April 6th, 2008, 05:49 AM

Actually, The Bluegrass Trust and Preserve Lexington _did not_ know the specifics of Webb's development, as he stated above. They knew that the Webbs were _planning_ a development but that there were no detail released, such as renderings or specifics on the building itself. That I am 100% certain -- knowing many within the organizations/groups, and having been active in some that are opposed to the project. I'm not certain on LFUCG, though.

g-man, it's basically a long reply from Webb himself towards critics of the project. No cliff-notes, but basically take any statement made against the project, and flip it. Tada. He's backpedaling and defending his actions, and has stalled any development on the project for 60 days so that others can hear his side of the story. As he stated in the H-L a few days ago, he is taking the time to answer comments and share his viewpoints on the project which he would not have done so in the past -- i.e., not railroading a project through -- mainly because there is significant opposition to the project, not only from local residents, but from many organizations like Preserve Lexington, The Bluegrass Trust, National Trust for Historic Preservation and from people like former vice mayor Gray. The Courthouse Area Review Design Board was going to announce to oppose the project on its current terms until there is more data or revisions to the project -- which I hope the 60 day period will provide more of both.

seicer

April 6th, 2008, 05:56 AM

What kind of a response is that? Ian wants to think about it, don't you? I could think of a few different blocks to do something, seeing as I'm in that field. What I'm asking is what would you do? Do you or don't you have something positive to contribute?

I have plenty to contribute, and have done so in the past. You rail against every user who oh so hails negative against the Webbs or Centrepointe. It's a shame you didn't specifically ask other users who are supporters of the project for their input.

$250 million. Are you serious? If Webb spent this much time and energy on redevelopment elsewhere, he could get the job done and there wouldn't be this much opposition.

Rupp Arena lots
Transit Center development
Numerous vacant parcels throughout the city
Vine-Main-Rose
Limestone-Upper-Vine-Main

Mind you that some already have conceptual plans, but they are just areas where Webb could have focused his energies years ago. No one is opposed to higher density or infill. What people are opposed to is the railroading of the project, and the possible demolition of several historic structures that are listed on the National Register for Historic Places, a plan that is opposed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, The Bluegrass Trust, Preserve Lexington, and fundamentally by the Courthouse Area Review Design Board.

Does this need to be a 35-story tower to be successful? Can he spend the $250 million on say... the Transit Center instead and purchase the parcels from the developer there? Or reconstruct the Rupp Arena lots and work with that group to produce something spectacular there?

cartomanlex

April 6th, 2008, 06:06 AM

Seicer, you are spending a lot of time and effort avoiding the question. Can't you read. What would you do? Not, what can Webb do elsewhere. Give me something positive that you would do if you had the money and desire to make Lexington better. The question is not about this project or railroading anything through, just what would you do to make Lexington better.

seicer

April 6th, 2008, 06:11 AM

Replace the Webb with my name, and you'd see what I'd do with $250 million. Your trolling for heated replies is simply fantastic tonight.

So what would you do with $250 million?

seicer

April 6th, 2008, 01:29 PM

An architectural review board wouldn't be a bad deal -- considering that we had a lot of crap go up in the past 30 years.... and one notable project in the past two years at Vine and Mill. This is a good read that pretty much goes with what the opponents of the project have been saying from the start: slow down, open the forum up for questions, consider changes to the design, and don't railroad this project through.

Development dance needs fine tuning (http://www.kentucky.com/779/story/368052.html)
By Tom Eblen, Herald-Leader, April 6, 2008

Lexington has always fancied itself as the belle of the ball.

We were the "Athens of the West." We are the "Horse Capital of the World." Queens, sheikhs and captains of industry come to visit, and sometimes buy a place to stay.

So why do so many of us act like desperate wallflowers whenever a real estate developer rushes in and asks us to dance? Any dance. Oh, and if you want to make out in the parking lot, that's OK, too. We know you're in a hurry.

Developer Dudley Webb spent two years putting together plans for CentrePointe, a $250 million hotel, condo and retail tower that would cover a block in the center of Lexington. It would replace 14 structures that date as far back as 1826 and house the hub of young nightlife. But the public didn't officially hear of Webb's plans until March 4, when he unveiled renderings and asked for quick approval and a $70 million tax break.

Webb hadn't done the development dance in Lexington for several years, and he was surprised to hear that the music has changed.

While many business people instinctively embraced CentrePointe, a large and diverse group of citizens pushed back hard for a variety of reasons. Faced with possible rejection by one government panel, Webb last Wednesday asked for a 60-day delay so he could try to sell his plan to the public and compromise with his critics.

A time for questions

What happens during the next two months and the government approval periods that follow will determine the fate of this project, and it could well set the tone for development in Lexington for years to come. It's a time to ask a lot of questions, such as:

Does this project make economic sense? The nation appears headed for recession, if it isn't there already, and construction and lending markets are in a slump. The proposed luxury hotel at the Kentucky Horse Park could be scratched if government bonds to build it aren't sold by April 15.

Where is CentrePointe's financing coming from? How solid is it? With tax increment financing involved, it's not just the developers' necks on the line.

What's the market demand for this building? Downtown hotel occupancy is a middling 65 percent. Webb's CentrePointe Marriott would add 243 rooms to the market.

Does downtown Lexington need more condos and stores any time soon? Downtown has experienced a housing boom, with more than 900 units built in the past five years. But drive around and you'll see a lot of "For Sale" signs in condo windows, and a lot of empty retail space.

Is this the same old preservation vs. development debate? I don't think so.

Webb argues that none of the block's 14 buildings are historic in the traditional sense. But some of them, such as the 180-year-old Morton's Row that includes Joe Rosenberg's pawn shop, are among Lexington's oldest remaining commercial buildings.

None of the preservationists I've talked to want the buildings restored as artifacts. They want them, or pieces of them, or even just the fa�ades of some of them, incorporated into an exceptional contemporary building that will reflect Lexington's past while providing economic vitality for its future.

Half a century ago, Lexington had one of the nation's most impressive collections of antebellum structures. Many of those buildings were lost to so-called urban renewal and foolish redevelopment. Think what could be done if we still had them. We could have more of the attractive redevelopment now happening along Third Street east of Limestone and on Limestone between High and Maxwell. There could be more urban gems like Victorian Square, which was developed by none other than Dudley Webb.

What are downtowns for?

In an era of drive-up convenience and suburban sameness, the only reason people go downtown anymore is because it's interesting. Great architecture with a sense of place and history is more interesting than a tower that could just as easily be in Atlanta or Indianapolis.

Perhaps Webb is right and it isn't possible or feasible to reuse any of the block's old buildings. But it's at least worth a good look before the bulldozers move in.

What about the young people? Lexington's economic development leaders are always fretting about the need to attract and keep creative young people and bring nightlife downtown. Yet nowhere is it happening more than on this block that includes several clubs and The Dame music hall, which was recently given 90 days to pack up and leave.

Can nightlife that has sprung up organically on this block be uprooted and transplanted elsewhere? Or will it die because young people are moving to cities that are more creative and welcoming? Those are big questions, and economic development leaders should have been asking them long before now.

And then there's the Farmers Market, which brings Lexingtonians of all ages to the block on Saturday mornings. Can it be successfully moved or, as Webb has suggested, be welcomed back after construction and survive in the shadow of a 35-story tower?

Look forward, not back

If CentrePointe is built as planned, do we risk having a monument to our old economic development model rather than a laboratory for a new one? Is the future of downtown about bringing tourists and conventioneers to visit occasionally, or is it about creating a place where locals will want to live, work and visit frequently?

Webb has a controversial past, but he has done some fine projects that have been good for Lexington. I think he's honest when he says he wants the best for downtown. But his vision, like anyone else's, is limited by his experience.

The block may belong to Webb, Rosenberg and their partners, but it's in the middle of our city and they need our tax money to build on it. Whatever is built at CentrePointe will send ripples throughout downtown for a generation. It's worth a broader conversation and more diverse, creative thinking.

Webb, in a letter last Monday to my blog, said he is willing to listen to others' ideas. "It is just that we have now been working on this project for over two years now and that we cannot drag this out forever," he wrote.

So whose fault is that? Partly his for not seeking public engagement sooner, and partly ours for not demanding that of developers.

While we're trying to have two years' worth of discussions in the next two months, plus trying to organize the international design competition Vice Mayor Jim Gray has suggested, we also need to think beyond CentrePointe.

We must build consensus around a creative downtown master plan -- and then stick to it. We should consider creating an architectural review board to judge the suitability of future downtown projects, as Cincinnati and many other cities have done.

Otherwise, we'll be in the same place we are now the next time a developer waltzes in at midnight with another take-it-or-leave-it proposition.

We'll never be the belle of the ball if everyone knows we're easy.

cartomanlex

April 7th, 2008, 01:03 AM

Webb hadn't done the development dance in Lexington for several years, and he was surprised to hear that the music has changed.

While many business people instinctively embraced CentrePointe, a large and diverse group of citizens pushed back hard for a variety of reasons.

Does this project make economic sense?

Having not done a project in a few years does not say that the music has changed. Just that the ones who want to call the tune are different. By his own statement, the civic leaders have asked him to do something for downtown. To do something for the hotel room situation. Something to help with the completed Lexington Center expansion. Webb has admitted that he did not come up with this on his own.

What are downtowns for?Downtowns are the center of a city's life force. The heart of its professional, economic and cultural life. The young people who are shouting the most about this project are but a minor percentage of those that the building of would affect. Young people do come to Lexington and stay. Mr. Webb came in 1965 and never left.

And were these building to be saved, restored, incorporated in the project or whatever may be solution they want. Where would the Dame go during the protracted process and would the end result not be the same as it is now?

When you talk about railroading the project through, you don't think that Shelburne Plaza and the Newtown Pike project was not railroaded through. with the demise of the old Southern Freight Depot. Or the oversize and out of character look of the Mark in its setting, railroaded through? Or maybe the Artek project being out of style with the historic district of the Western Suburbs, was that not railroaded through? Each of the foregoing efforts is in compliance with the existing regulations as is Centerpointe.

As for a sockpuppet of the Webbs, I do not work for nor have I been in the corporate offices and I only have a nodding acquaintance with Dudley(that being over 18 years ago). I do believe that what they are doing is in the best interest of Lexington. The city and its people(including you).

seicer

April 7th, 2008, 04:37 AM

Those had far more public presentations and meetings (in reply to Mark Lofts, Artek, etc.). I went to at least three for Mark before they were applying for demolition permits. Centrepointe developers were applying for demolition permits _before_ the first meeting even began!

Now that you brought up the old depot, it's being demolished (or has already been). The fire only hastened its demise, not that it was much worth saving given that it had lost all of its character many years ago. Had it been repurposed or at least salvaged years ago, and the warehouses were replaced with new development, it would have made a fantastic market (e.g. Capitol Market in Charleston).

In retrospect, I do believe the Webbs have the interest of Lexington in mind, but that there is going to be no solution to this issue that will solve everyones complaints. It's one reason why they haven't left for other pastures, but they should at the minimum, hold more public meetings on this project, delay any demolition until we are certain this project is 100%-a-go, and complete a through documentation of the remaining structures.

cartomanlex

April 7th, 2008, 02:23 PM

Here is another "prima donna" architect who thinks he knows it all.

Say no thanks to CentrePointe

By Graham Pohl

http://www.kentucky.com/589/story/368827.html

Do you get the feeling that someone is shoving something down your throat? Because they are. It is big and it is bad. It is CentrePointe.

In an effort to improve the proposed CentrePointe development so that it might seem to fit -- and benefit -- Lexington, Vice Mayor Jim Gray attempted to initiate a design competition, which the developers now say won't happen because they are "too far along."

Gray has been very diplomatic in his valiant efforts, never actually saying how destructive CentrePointe is.

For most of us, it's not the affected name that sticks in the craw. It is the lazy, uninspired design. Most people seem to recognize that it is a colossal design failure.

Most disturbing is that the retrograde design is contemptuous of its urban context. The name says it all: CentrePointe. The implication that this development is to be the new heart of Lexington reveals a disquieting arrogance. CentrePointe could become such a heart only if the rest of the city didn't exist.

There is no evidence that the CentrePointe design team made any effort to incorporate the historic fabric (and the vibrant arts and social scene it sponsors) within the larger development. The proposal is absurdly self-referential, with a symmetrical scheme around a U-shaped court that responds to nothing except itself.

The CentrePointe development team is almost identical to the group that built the Lexington Financial Center, the big blue tower. That building leaves voids at the sidewalk where storefronts should welcome pedestrians. It speaks an architectural language completely foreign to our region, adding nothing to our sense of place and unique identity.

Just as Big Blue would be more comfortable in Denver, the 40-story CentrePointe tower seems to have been plucked from 1980s Atlanta. To make matters worse, the tower grossly violates the 15-story height limit recommended by Lexington's Downtown Master Plan. It insults the careful, $400,000 process that achieved consensus for that plan.

Unlike Big Blue, however, CentrePointe is grounded by a four-story base with the potential to make the kind of street definition and scale that would be great for Lexington. But it is pulled back too far and placed behind a grove of trees along Vine Street, and the entire Upper Street facade above the first level will be spoiled by the perimeter placement of core elements (like mechanical rooms) on the second and third floors. This will mean a two-story bank of dead walls along Upper Street.

The four-story plinth, an effort to comply with the Courthouse Area Design Guidelines, may seem to signal respect for the scale of existing buildings, but its undifferentiated, sterile, repetitive quality fails to create the kind of variety and texture that make the other side of Main Street so appealing.

Furthermore, destroying the historic fabric eliminates the diverse economic opportunities inherent in these properties. The entire block is to become the realm of the well-heeled, if not the worldly.

The positive aspects of the proposal include the developers' promise to achieve LEED certification, a "green" building initiative that may be the most important characteristic for any new building project. Achieving such certification is a process affecting every stage of design and construction, one that demands third-party verification and benefits us all. Certification should be a non-negotiable condition for the city's participation.

Another allure of the CentrePointe proposal is anticipation of new retail businesses and an elegant downtown hotel, the success of which would promise new vitality and job creation. But the financial viability of the entire project is based on the owners pocketing the first 30 years of income and property taxes generated by the project, leaving the city to shoulder the costs of required infrastructure improvements and maintenance.

The entire proposal will need massive revision if it is to weave itself into Lexington's urban fabric and history in a meaningful way. Let's say thanks, but no thanks, to this gracious but misguided offer.

seicer

April 7th, 2008, 03:43 PM

Or it could be someone else's opinions that is critical of Centrepointe. You seem to have a witty or unflattering message for every commentator that so raises a question against the project.

cartomanlex

April 7th, 2008, 05:09 PM

Have you seen some of the damage that he has done to the historic houses in Ashland Park in the name of modernization?

He correctly rails against "house warts" , but some of his(and others) additions have helped to exacerbate the storm sewerage problems of the Chevy Chase area.

seicer

April 7th, 2008, 05:23 PM

No, what's the address? We shouldn't be judging a person's opinions solely on the additions to a house... since this is Ashland Park, are there not meetings for any major additions/renovations?

cartomanlex

April 7th, 2008, 05:40 PM

The one that I have in mind is on Slashes Rd. This is in a National Register district and there are no approval meetings required. Another is the one on S. Ashland Ave. and while it is now in a local historic district, requiring BOAR approval, at the time it was done, it was not.

I am sure that there are others but have no specifics at this time.

seicer

April 7th, 2008, 08:01 PM

Some H-L letters to the editor for 06 April:

CENTREPOINTE FAVORS WEALTHY AT TAXPAYERS' EXPENSE

Lexington has been trying for decades to get people to come downtown at night, yet here we are about to stomp on the very thing we hoped for.

According to developers, we need a four-star hotel downtown so that four-star-type guests won't have to stay in Cincinnati or Louisville. I find it ironic, yet expected, in this day and age that the one-star-type guy -- also known as the taxpayer -- will have to foot the bill through tax abatements for this four-star-type guy's project.

Let them sleep someplace else if it means giving up a unique, independent, prosperous and desperately needed entertainment district.

This same kind of corporate welfare mentality is prevalent in the plans to replace Rupp Arena. The current facility is more than adequate. The new facility will not increase seating capacity. As far as I can tell, the only difference will be corporate boxes for the wealthy and seat backs for the rest of us.

As proven by attendance figures at University of Kentucky games, the lack of seat backs in the upper arena certainly hasn't deterred "the rest of us" from attending.

So here we go again, providing tax abatements so that more four-star-type guys can have sky boxes while the rest of us support it with our taxes. No thanks.

Mike Donnelly
Lexington

Make it taller

I've been reading about this magnificent hotel and condo project in the making, and I'm very disappointed by some of the reactions it has gotten.

Now The Webb Cos.' plans to scale CentrePointe back five stories? Granted, the original design isn't perfect -- developers should save some of the existing architecture and make it blend a little better -- but they should feel free to raise it high, build it grand and make Lexington proud. It'll be the jewel of downtown.

It's true there aren't enough travelers to fill it up every day, but there will be. Build it and they will come, right? The 2010 Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games are coming, so now is the time to get started.

As for the nightlife on that block, those businesses are too great to just die. They will find a temporary home, and then resume business in a new facility.

The block is in dire need of renovation and expansion, and this is the chance. We should preserve what we can, but we shouldn't hesitate to make progress.

I look forward to seeing this project begin.

Matthew Raybould
Lexington

Historic block

Asked to comment on The Webb Cos.' plan to destroy every building on the block that houses The Dame, Downtown Development Authority president Harold Tate said that "the historic fabric is important to downtown, but right now I don't think anybody can say what the historic fabric is."

So, despite admitting that he doesn't know whether there are historic buildings on the Dame block, Tate agrees that all of the buildings should be destroyed. Perfect logic.

There are historic buildings on this block. The buildings occupied by Mia's and Rosenberg's were constructed in 1826 by Lexington's first great entrepreneur, William Morton.

These are the oldest functioning commercial buildings standing in Lexington. While not as old, other buildings on the block have historical and architectural significance.

Don't be fooled by the current facades of these buildings. With a little care by owners who aren't looking to tear them down, these historic structures can again stand as proud and tall as any 40-story tower.

Tate's proposal to survey historic downtown buildings worthy of preservation can start with several of the buildings on this block.

Ryan Hrvatin
Lexington

Project saves farms

I've been very surprised to hear so many objections to the CentrePointe development. Aside from the 2,500 construction jobs and 900 permanent jobs that this project would create, it is a great example of how infill projects help conserve farmland.

If the developers scrapped the plans for building CentrePointe in downtown Lexington and decided instead to build the same amount of hotel, condominium, office, retail and parking space on the outskirts of Lexington, it would take up about 80 acres of green space.

The tower would also be a great aesthetic improvement over the asphalt parking lots and dilapidated buildings now on the site.

I hope the Courthouse Design Review Board will recognize CentrePointe as the great opportunity that it is.

Jeff Jefferson
Lexington

Elitist development

I read about the plans for CentrePointe with astonishment. This project is not about Lexington; it is about money and should be dealt with as such.

Lexington had the potential to be a great city, but unchecked development by insensitive leaders has left the city struggling with its identity.

Great cities are creative. They are visually interesting, attractive and vibrant. They encourage local arts and are accessible to all types of people. They use their heritage as a foundation for development. They do not destroy the very thing that makes them unique.

Remember the many farms in Fayette County that are now buried under housing developments? When historic fabric is removed, it is irreversible; a city or county cannot build it back.

Razing an entire block of historic buildings to hastily put up a building that decidedly has no relation to its surroundings or location is absurd. CentrePointe will be as sterile as a hospital room and could be located in any poorly managed city in the United States. It is an elitist project, initiated by elitists and will be patronized by an elitist society.

For the sake of Lexington, I hope the project fails or at least is modified to reuse the historic buildings that are some of the last vestiges of a city with its own identity and character.

Meg Nowack
Lexington

Not innovative

I am all for innovative, people-positive development downtown, but I am opposed to the CentrePointe project for several reasons:

• It does not meet current guidelines.

• It goes against the carefully studied recommendations of the Downtown Master Plan.

• It ignores the current and future needs of downtown residents and small businesses.

• It is an unremarkable design that does nothing positive for the city's attractiveness or reputation.

• The history of developments such as this warrants caution at the very least.

• It puts an undue burden of risk on the city and its citizens with questionable returns.

This has obviously been in the works behind the scenes for a long time. Expecting Lexingtonians to acquiesce to a blustery fiat of inflated need and last-minute time constraints is a red flag in itself.

A project of this scope and prominence affects the whole of downtown and should be considered carefully in that light.

Phillip High
Lexington

Build over useless mall

Every once in a while I have an idea that my wife actually likes. Most recently, she liked hearing my epiphany as we were driving on Richmond Road and turned left into the ghost land known to many as Lexington Mall:

Why don't developers Dudley and Woodford Webb make something shiny and beautiful out of that property?

I'm old enough to remember fishing with my grandfather there. I'm sure the mall's builders thought it was worth the sacrifice of our beloved fishing hole. I never forgave them.

Why tear down historic downtown buildings to make room for tall and shiny ones? I'm sure there are arguments that say "if we build them, spenders will come." Maybe they will, and maybe they won't.

The Webbs could spend much less on this endeavor and could still lend their wealth and expertise to preserve historic areas of downtown Lexington.

That seems like a win-win epiphany to me.

Jeff Bradford
Lexington

Positive solutions

I have several positive solutions to the ongoing CentrePointe debate:

• Work to upgrade the Hyatt and Radisson into four-star hotels.

• Condemn and demolish the blight known as Lexington Mall. Building a hotel there would spur development on Richmond Road, which is the corridor to Interstate 75 from the southern United States.

• Condemn and demolish Turfland Mall, which is on its last legs. A hotel in that location would have easy access to Versailles Road and Blue Grass Airport.

Robert Clark
Lexington

Fix existing structures

The Dame block is a vibrant part of downtown. Drive the streets around it on any weekend night to see hundreds out to visit friends, see live bands, sing karaoke and wind down after work. Imagine that same street without those businesses.

The CentrePointe development is to have condominiums, retail space and a hotel. We already have a number of new condos going up, and there is plenty of retail space available at Festival Market and the Civic Center Shops. We already have two hotels that are rarely at capacity.

It is my understanding that the money needed to fund the project is not yet available, nor does the project meet Lexington's guidelines for development. Yet developers are planning to demolish historic buildings.

The proposed building is a 40-story monstrosity that would not fit into the image of this city. People come here for the advantages of urban life in a place that still has the look, feel and comfort of a small town.

My hope is that downtown Lexington will remain the beautiful place it is. We should use the tax breaks that will come as a result of keeping these gorgeous historic buildings to restore them and encourage growth of our entertainment district to attract more people downtown.

Nurture our historic and unique Lexington, don't destroy it.

Alison Blair
Lexington

No need to go downtown

Lexington is rapidly becoming Anytown, U.S.A. With the construction of the proposed new hotel, the city would become even nearer to that title.

What happened to the concept of a vibrant downtown? Certainly a 40-story hotel complex would quickly put the quietus on that by getting rid of many things that make or made Lexington unique.

Do we really need another hotel when the ones downtown and near North Broadway and Interstate 75 are not near 100 percent occupancy most of the time?

There is little enough need for most of us to go downtown now, though it seemed to be on the upswing. The CentrePointe development would put an end to that.

Beth Graves
Lexington

Systems can't support it

The proposed CentrePointe development in downtown Lexington brings with it a number of unresolved problems that in some ways illustrate how not to proceed with such a proposal.

The consent decree between the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Justice, the state and the city soon will be in federal court for approval, and it should require that major developments like CentrePointe have sufficient sanitary and storm sewer infrastructure between it and the appropriate wastewater treatment plant.

That the infrastructure in downtown Lexington is sufficient to support a project the size of CentrePointe is highly unlikely.

It seems obvious from the level of public outcry that the developer did not properly vet the project with the Urban County Council, nearby residents and other elements of the community. Apparently, the project has been in the making for three years behind closed doors in a manner more common in the 1950s than in the 21st century.

That Lexington can support a 240-room hotel downtown is highly questionable and reminiscent of The Webb Cos.' ventures with Kentucky Central Life Insurance in the 1980s and 1990s.

Whether the buildings that now make up the CentrePointe block have historical value or not, it seems clear that the project does not fit with many people's conception of the downtown area in the future.

The design reminds me of the haunted tower in the movie Ghostbusters.

Walter Gaffield

Lexington

seicer

April 7th, 2008, 08:06 PM

Webbs miss center point (http://www.kentucky.com/591/story/368053.html)
Editoral, Herald-Leader, April 7, 2008

Developers need to accept that others have stake in downtown project, too

Dudley Webb commented on his newfound patience Wednesday after he proposed a 60-day delay on his request to demolish buildings on the block slated for CentrePointe, his mega-development.

Patience is a strange quality for the developer to tout. It's been less than four weeks since he went public with plans for a project that would destroy several historic commercial structures, including one dating from 1826 that is believed to be downtown's oldest building in continuous use.

Webb says he will use the two- month delay to, among other things, hold a public meeting on the project to hear ideas for the proposed hotel-condo-office-retail project.

But, he says, a lot of things are not open for discussion, including changing the height and mass of the 35-story tower or redesigning the project to save any historic structures on the block.

"We've gone as far as we can," he told Herald-Leader reporter Beverly Fortune.

That's not good enough.

Webb, nephew Woodford Webb and their partners aren't the only players in this project. The Urban County Council must approve tax increment financing for $70 million in tax dollars to subsidize the project. The Courthouse Area Design Review Board must approve the project and grant permission to tear down buildings.

For the sake of the developers and the community, a few things should be said now, at the beginning of this cooling off period:

• Neither the courthouse board nor the council should give the Webbs a pass on this project because they asked for the delay. The delay may be conciliatory, but it was also tactical. The board's staff had already recommended postponing the hearing because of problems with the application.

Webb's concept of time is a little flawed anyway. He moaned earlier that Vice Mayor Jim Gray's proposal for a design competition 18 months into project development came too late to make any significant changes.

Yet the project was under wraps those 18 months. The public and the council got their first view of it March 4. That's when the clock started ticking. Don't rush us now.

• Hundreds of people have gone to meetings, written letters and logged onto Web sites to express concern about this project and the block it would occupy.

Those concerns include preserving some of the historic fabric, incorporating the recommendations of the recently completed Downtown Master Plan and presenting a project that really contributes to life downtown.

Coming back after two months with largely cosmetic changes won't satisfy those concerns.

• The decision last year to limit development in Fayette County doesn't mean we have to accept any and all infill projects. A recent survey by the city's planning staff found almost 5,000 vacant or underused acres inside the boundary that defines where development is allowed in Lexington.

This argument will certainly arise as future projects are proposed, but decision-makers should reject right now and forever that the only way to save our unique bluegrass landscape is to embrace every highrise that comes down the pike.

We can demand high-quality, compatible infill that contributes to neighborhoods and commercial areas without endangering an acre of farmland.

This is a critical moment for the future of Lexington, one that could define the quality of life here for generations. For three decades, our urban redevelopment and suburban expansion have been less than we deserved, unworthy of this beautiful place.

We can do better, we must do better.

bigwilley

April 8th, 2008, 01:57 AM

"No need to go downtown

Lexington is rapidly becoming Anytown, U.S.A. With the construction of the proposed new hotel, the city would become even nearer to that title.

What happened to the concept of a vibrant downtown? Certainly a 40-story hotel complex would quickly put the quietus on that by getting rid of many things that make or made Lexington unique.

Do we really need another hotel when the ones downtown and near North Broadway and Interstate 75 are not near 100 percent occupancy most of the time?

There is little enough need for most of us to go downtown now, though it seemed to be on the upswing. The CentrePointe development would put an end to that.

Beth Graves
Lexington"

That was very stupid, that title basically says she wants to see suburban sprawl. That would be less original than a highrise! That would be the face of our skyline.

g-man430

April 8th, 2008, 02:15 AM

Too many articles. :nuts: The media has gone overboard once again.

cartomanlex

April 8th, 2008, 02:15 AM

CENTREPOINTE FAVORS WEALTHY AT TAXPAYERS' EXPENSE

Lexington has been trying for decades to get people to come downtown at night, yet here we are about to stomp on the very thing we hoped for.

According to developers, we need a four-star hotel downtown so that four-star-type guests won't have to stay in Cincinnati or Louisville. I find it ironic, yet expected, in this day and age that the one-star-type guy -- also known as the taxpayer -- will have to foot the bill through tax abatements for this four-star-type guy's project.

Let them sleep someplace else if it means giving up a unique, independent, prosperous and desperately needed entertainment district.

This same kind of corporate welfare mentality is prevalent in the plans to replace Rupp Arena. The current facility is more than adequate. The new facility will not increase seating capacity. As far as I can tell, the only difference will be corporate boxes for the wealthy and seat backs for the rest of us.

As proven by attendance figures at University of Kentucky games, the lack of seat backs in the upper arena certainly hasn't deterred "the rest of us" from attending.

So here we go again, providing tax abatements so that more four-star-type guys can have sky boxes while the rest of us support it with our taxes. No thanks.

Mike Donnelly
LexingtonMike, you might be right. We need to keep Lexington to ourselves. We need no more money in our economy, we have enough for the time being. It just needs to distributed more fairly. We don't need any more fancy tourists coming in here sleeping in our hotels, eating our food, seeing our horse farms or even watching our Kentucky Wildcats. And as for you from eastern Kentucky, you can watch it on TV, leave the arena to us.

Make it taller

I've been reading about this magnificent hotel and condo project in the making, and I'm very disappointed by some of the reactions it has gotten.

Now The Webb Cos.' plans to scale CentrePointe back five stories? Granted, the original design isn't perfect -- developers should save some of the existing architecture and make it blend a little better -- but they should feel free to raise it high, build it grand and make Lexington proud. It'll be the jewel of downtown.

It's true there aren't enough travelers to fill it up every day, but there will be. Build it and they will come, right? The 2010 Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games are coming, so now is the time to get started.

As for the nightlife on that block, those businesses are too great to just die. They will find a temporary home, and then resume business in a new facility.

The block is in dire need of renovation and expansion, and this is the chance. We should preserve what we can, but we shouldn't hesitate to make progress.

I look forward to seeing this project begin.

Matthew Raybould
LexingtonMatthew, I'm sorry but the Dame is just too fragile an enterprise to go moving it around helter/skelter. Those buildings are in fine shape and pass all applicable codes. Making it bigger and better would just encourage the vagrants to loiter there.

Historic block

Asked to comment on The Webb Cos.' plan to destroy every building on the block that houses The Dame, Downtown Development Authority president Harold Tate said that "the historic fabric is important to downtown, but right now I don't think anybody can say what the historic fabric is."

So, despite admitting that he doesn't know whether there are historic buildings on the Dame block, Tate agrees that all of the buildings should be destroyed. Perfect logic.

There are historic buildings on this block. The buildings occupied by Mia's and Rosenberg's were constructed in 1826 by Lexington's first great entrepreneur, William Morton.

These are the oldest functioning commercial buildings standing in Lexington. While not as old, other buildings on the block have historical and architectural significance.

Don't be fooled by the current facades of these buildings. With a little care by owners who aren't looking to tear them down, these historic structures can again stand as proud and tall as any 40-story tower.

Tate's proposal to survey historic downtown buildings worthy of preservation can start with several of the buildings on this block.

Ryan Hrvatin
LexingtonRyan, your second sentence verges on lunacy. It clearly shows that you do not know the English language. Mr Tate in no way said that there were no historic buildings there, but that the fabric could not be identified. And these functioning business no longer function as the did, with families living above their shops and 24 hour vitality. If they did, then they would lovingly maintain them.

Project saves farms

I've been very surprised to hear so many objections to the CentrePointe development. Aside from the 2,500 construction jobs and 900 permanent jobs that this project would create, it is a great example of how infill projects help conserve farmland.

If the developers scrapped the plans for building CentrePointe in downtown Lexington and decided instead to build the same amount of hotel, condominium, office, retail and parking space on the outskirts of Lexington, it would take up about 80 acres of green space.

The tower would also be a great aesthetic improvement over the asphalt parking lots and dilapidated buildings now on the site.

I hope the Courthouse Design Review Board will recognize CentrePointe as the great opportunity that it is.

Jeff Jefferson
LexingtonJeff, I think it be closer to 20 acres

Elitist development

I read about the plans for CentrePointe with astonishment. This project is not about Lexington; it is about money and should be dealt with as such.

Lexington had the potential to be a great city, but unchecked development by insensitive leaders has left the city struggling with its identity.

Great cities are creative. They are visually interesting, attractive and vibrant. They encourage local arts and are accessible to all types of people. They use their heritage as a foundation for development. They do not destroy the very thing that makes them unique.

Remember the many farms in Fayette County that are now buried under housing developments? When historic fabric is removed, it is irreversible; a city or county cannot build it back.

Razing an entire block of historic buildings to hastily put up a building that decidedly has no relation to its surroundings or location is absurd. CentrePointe will be as sterile as a hospital room and could be located in any poorly managed city in the United States. It is an elitist project, initiated by elitists and will be patronized by an elitist society.

For the sake of Lexington, I hope the project fails or at least is modified to reuse the historic buildings that are some of the last vestiges of a city with its own identity and character.

Meg Nowack
LexingtonMeg, every decision made, whether it be about politics, religion, sports, economics, agriculture or even tourism is based on two things. Money and power. It all boils down to that. Money and power. Those who you call elitists are the one who have the money and power. Lexington would like to have some more of that.

Not innovative

I am all for innovative, people-positive development downtown, but I am opposed to the CentrePointe project for several reasons:

• It does not meet current guidelines.

• It goes against the carefully studied recommendations of the Downtown Master Plan.

• It ignores the current and future needs of downtown residents and small businesses.

• It is an unremarkable design that does nothing positive for the city's attractiveness or reputation.

• The history of developments such as this warrants caution at the very least.

• It puts an undue burden of risk on the city and its citizens with questionable returns.

This has obviously been in the works behind the scenes for a long time. Expecting Lexingtonians to acquiesce to a blustery fiat of inflated need and last-minute time constraints is a red flag in itself.

A project of this scope and prominence affects the whole of downtown and should be considered carefully in that light.

Phillip High
LexingtonPhillip, Which current guidelines? Do mean the Downtown Master Plan that was adopted only in its major principles, not its entirety? And which future need would those be? Since Lexington has never seen a development like this , to which history do you refer? To which burden do you refer? The TIF measure which would be tax money that has not been recognized yet and cannot come out of your pocket now.

Build over useless mall

Every once in a while I have an idea that my wife actually likes. Most recently, she liked hearing my epiphany as we were driving on Richmond Road and turned left into the ghost land known to many as Lexington Mall:

Why don't developers Dudley and Woodford Webb make something shiny and beautiful out of that property?

I'm old enough to remember fishing with my grandfather there. I'm sure the mall's builders thought it was worth the sacrifice of our beloved fishing hole. I never forgave them.

Why tear down historic downtown buildings to make room for tall and shiny ones? I'm sure there are arguments that say "if we build them, spenders will come." Maybe they will, and maybe they won't.

The Webbs could spend much less on this endeavor and could still lend their wealth and expertise to preserve historic areas of downtown Lexington.

That seems like a win-win epiphany to me.

Jeff Bradford
LexingtonJeff, putting a project like this 2 miles from the downtown will not do anything for downtown. Let alone the fact that the Webbs do not own it and cannot condemn it.

Positive solutions

I have several positive solutions to the ongoing CentrePointe debate:

• Work to upgrade the Hyatt and Radisson into four-star hotels.

• Condemn and demolish the blight known as Lexington Mall. Building a hotel there would spur development on Richmond Road, which is the corridor to Interstate 75 from the southern United States.

• Condemn and demolish Turfland Mall, which is on its last legs. A hotel in that location would have easy access to Versailles Road and Blue Grass Airport.

Robert Clark
LexingtonRobert, your positive solutions fall a bit short. They do nothing to add to the hotel room situation and are a bit too far to walk to downtown in a city with a mediocre transit system.

Answering any more of these will only get repetitive so i will quit here.

Fix existing structures

The Dame block is a vibrant part of downtown. Drive the streets around it on any weekend night to see hundreds out to visit friends, see live bands, sing karaoke and wind down after work. Imagine that same street without those businesses.

The CentrePointe development is to have condominiums, retail space and a hotel. We already have a number of new condos going up, and there is plenty of retail space available at Festival Market and the Civic Center Shops. We already have two hotels that are rarely at capacity.

It is my understanding that the money needed to fund the project is not yet available, nor does the project meet Lexington's guidelines for development. Yet developers are planning to demolish historic buildings.

The proposed building is a 40-story monstrosity that would not fit into the image of this city. People come here for the advantages of urban life in a place that still has the look, feel and comfort of a small town.

My hope is that downtown Lexington will remain the beautiful place it is. We should use the tax breaks that will come as a result of keeping these gorgeous historic buildings to restore them and encourage growth of our entertainment district to attract more people downtown.

Nurture our historic and unique Lexington, don't destroy it.

Alison Blair
Lexington

No need to go downtown

Lexington is rapidly becoming Anytown, U.S.A. With the construction of the proposed new hotel, the city would become even nearer to that title.

What happened to the concept of a vibrant downtown? Certainly a 40-story hotel complex would quickly put the quietus on that by getting rid of many things that make or made Lexington unique.

Do we really need another hotel when the ones downtown and near North Broadway and Interstate 75 are not near 100 percent occupancy most of the time?

There is little enough need for most of us to go downtown now, though it seemed to be on the upswing. The CentrePointe development would put an end to that.

Beth Graves
Lexington

Systems can't support it

The proposed CentrePointe development in downtown Lexington brings with it a number of unresolved problems that in some ways illustrate how not to proceed with such a proposal.

The consent decree between the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Justice, the state and the city soon will be in federal court for approval, and it should require that major developments like CentrePointe have sufficient sanitary and storm sewer infrastructure between it and the appropriate wastewater treatment plant.

That the infrastructure in downtown Lexington is sufficient to support a project the size of CentrePointe is highly unlikely.

It seems obvious from the level of public outcry that the developer did not properly vet the project with the Urban County Council, nearby residents and other elements of the community. Apparently, the project has been in the making for three years behind closed doors in a manner more common in the 1950s than in the 21st century.

That Lexington can support a 240-room hotel downtown is highly questionable and reminiscent of The Webb Cos.' ventures with Kentucky Central Life Insurance in the 1980s and 1990s.

Whether the buildings that now make up the CentrePointe block have historical value or not, it seems clear that the project does not fit with many people's conception of the downtown area in the future.

The design reminds me of the haunted tower in the movie Ghostbusters.

Walter Gaffield

Lexington

seicer

April 8th, 2008, 02:37 AM

There's no need to quote the entire passage -- the page has become even moreso lengthier than usual. I think you have also messed up your quoting towards the end. But there is also no reason to get so defensive and be quick to hash out at all of the critics -- including myself and all of the other posters who have dared opposed the development. You have called out Ian, myself, superflymike, and others, and then called others elitists among other terminology, which is wholly non-constructive to the discussion. It's also why I've gotten several PMs saying that if this continues, they will flat out refuse to post in regards to Centrepointe because the discussion has taken such a destructive path.

superflymike

April 8th, 2008, 02:48 AM

Meg, every decision made, whether it be about politics, religion, sports, economics, agriculture or even tourism is based on two things. Money and power. It all boils down to that. Money and power. Those who you call elitists are the one who have the money and power. Lexington would like to have some more of that.

I'm going to have to disagree with you

I would rather have people who actually care about the city

also you need to cool down a little bit about this whole thing

gt7834a

April 8th, 2008, 09:15 PM

Just because someone has a different vision for Lexington doesn't mean they don't care about Lexington. I promise you Dudley Webbs cares a great deal about Lexington and wants Lexington to be a great city. You may not like his idea but he is putting his time and money into a project with the belief that he can help Lexington. Trust me if he just wanted money he would just go build more Shell stations in the suburbs.

I like that fact that Dudley is taking the time the time to answer these questions. I don't think he is spinning when he points out clear misstatment of facts. The vast majority of people have no idea what happened with Ky Central nor the Webbs but they like to condem the Webbs like they do know. I have no problem with a guy pointing out those facts. You may hate Victorian Square or Festival Market but neither KY Central nor the Webbs did those projects strictly for money. They did it because they thought it was best for downtown. Maybe they were wrong, maybe they were right, it is too hard to tell at this point. Neither project was a great success but both still bring a lot of people downtown in the form of offices and restaurants, so they are not total failures.

madtony8k

April 8th, 2008, 09:38 PM

A cool video of downtown Lexington I found on youtube.

TECHo_O4XN8

It kind of gives you an idea of the scale of the city.

superflymike

April 8th, 2008, 11:34 PM

cartomanlex

April 8th, 2008, 11:59 PM

i wasn't talking about the webbs I was addressing his answer about lexington wanting more elitist, which I find usually only care about themselves

The statement was the Lexington collectively wants more money(revenue) and power(political clout) which you can only get with more population. We have decided that should not go on the fringes so it has to go downtown.

I don't want more elitists, they just come with the territory.

bigwilley

April 9th, 2008, 01:39 AM

Madtony thankyou for posting that video

madtony8k

April 9th, 2008, 02:50 AM

You're welcome. It's rare to see aireals of Lexington. It doesn't go along with anyone that says the project is out of scale with downtown. Downtown looks like it can handle it. Marriott has a good reputation, and if they want to build a hotel downtown, then maybe it's a good idea.

The building looks nice at the street level, but doesn't the tower look kind of grey?

seicer

April 9th, 2008, 03:30 AM

Brown/gray, kind of reminds me of the 1980s architecture that many do not miss, IMO. I would like to see something a little more exciting, especially at the street level, with some variety in the design. Nothing on the scale of Museum Plaza, but a step up from what could be a signature tower.

bigwilley

April 9th, 2008, 03:56 AM

i think a 400-500 foot version of central plaza in hong kong would look nice. Maybe not the exact same but that general shape :)

gt7834a

April 9th, 2008, 07:57 PM

I would like something with a little more steel and less dryvit. There are some very cool buildings being built around the country right now and this one, as it currently sits is attractive but unspectacular.
This is a building in Atlanta that they completed in the last couple of years that I really like.
http://www.atlantaarchitecture.info/Building/1449/1180_Peachtree.php

cartomanlex

April 10th, 2008, 04:37 AM

I was reminded today that we Lexingtonians have had a design competition in the recent past.
The Court House Plaza was the subject of such a competition and the entries ranged form stunning to unconventional, free form to structured and all points in between. Unfortunately I do not have access to any of the renderings of the winners, but I can tell you, what you see there now is not one of them. The reason? The City held the competition and the State footed the bill.

madtony8k

April 10th, 2008, 05:15 AM

I guess Lexington could buy into the emerald city look that Atlanta is starting to have, by building a sparkly light-blue glass tower. It is definitely a look Lexington could use. Something we are missing... a building with a spire. All of the buildings have boxy-looking tops. CentrePointe really goes along with the boxy-top look. It makes the buildings look kind of squat and drab when NOTHING in the city has a spire (besides some pretty churches).

Here's a link to a new website dedicated to the project:
http://www.centrepointelex.com/Home.aspx

madtony8k

April 10th, 2008, 05:30 AM

And I will totally eat on the restaurant on the top floor.

seicer

April 10th, 2008, 06:27 AM

Looks like they have bought out any similar domain names. WHOIS reveals that the registration data is private, but I've heard from a friend that the site is managed by the developers of Centrepointe. Any truth to that?

madtony8k

April 10th, 2008, 05:15 PM

^^
I just noticed this..
"Note: This site has no official affiliation with the developers of CentrePointe, LFUCG, or any committee related to the project. This site was developed merely as a side project to gather as much CentrePointe related information as possible and present it in one central location. This site does not guarantee the accuracy of any information presented on this site. If you discover any information on this site that is false, or misrepresented in any way, please use the contact form on the left to bring this to our attention."
.. on the homepage of the website.

TheDame

April 10th, 2008, 06:51 PM

I doubt the developers would mess with Google Ads. :lol:

card04

April 11th, 2008, 03:22 AM

From the looks of the pictures on the website, the building has a descent footprint as far as interaction with the streetscape goes. From what I understand retail is going to be put on the bottom floors. My only question would be if there is demand for it, and do you think it would be successful. From the general feeling I am getting local vendors would probably stay away, if that component of the building failed that block would be dead. Most mid-sized cities need large retail developments for it to remain healthy downtown, very few I ever been to naturally have a large retail scene that is scattered. Think Circle Center Mall in Indianapolis, that development is even very close to their convention center and gets a large amount of traffic from there, which I'm sure is a big help. Cordish is in the process of developing "City Center" which is another large retail development, which will also be close to a convention center.

madtony8k

April 11th, 2008, 06:09 AM

Perhaps the part of CentrePointe that is within the first 4 or 5 floors and is above the footprint can be utilized as a mall???...

Or maybe some form of entertainment.

seicer

April 11th, 2008, 06:10 AM

Rite Aid posted their notice today that they are closing by April 19. Not new news, but it's now visible. They are "relocating" to N. Broadway and Loundon.

madtony8k

April 11th, 2008, 02:32 PM

^^ now that's a part of town that sure could use some fixing up!

gt7834a

April 11th, 2008, 04:59 PM

There is already a rite aid there, they are just transfering everyone's perscriptions. I had been told that one of the requirements for selling to Centerpoint was that the Rite Aid would go back into the new space. I really hope that happens. It is very nice to have a downtown pharmacy plus a place to pick up drugstore type items. Now that Hutchinson's and Rite have/are closing there is no downtown pharmacy. Plus that would help fill up the retail and be a great service for the hotel/condos/office that is going in. I will be very disappointed if they don't end up back in this development.

cartomanlex

April 11th, 2008, 06:34 PM

I doubt that Rite Aid will ever occupy CentrePointe.

In the past four years or so, I am sure that you all have noticed the expansion of pharmacies in Lexington. What I call "the drug store wars". Rite Aid and Walgreen's seem to be in a race to see who can build the most pharmacies and place them in the prime locations. Rite Aid used to rent most of their locations and placed them in shopping centers or malls. Their current thinking seems to be stand alone locations on separate lots of ground. I believe it has to do with security measures of controlled substances and the desire for drive up windows.

In any case, the fate of the downtown Rite Aid was probably sealed by their corporate office and not the Webb project.

seicer

April 11th, 2008, 07:13 PM

I talked to the manager yesterday and they stated that they were moving out because of the Webb's Centrepointe development, having received essentially a "move out" letter similar to The Dame. The location was very profitable, and the manager added that they are currently searching for a new downtown location. Whether or not that is at Centrepointe, Main and Rose, or the new unnamed Main-Rose-Vine development is still uncertain.

Oh, and Webb has been "irritated" lately at all of the criticism of his project. So he released this (old) rendering of all of the developments he's done --
http://tomeblen.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/080410webbslexington.jpg

Note the lack of pedestrians :P I guess some of the buildings are okay, but many of the buildings he constructed along Vine are just hideous. Much like Vine itself. If that was to be developed today, it would surely look far different. That's what you get for designs of the 1970s and 1980s... Note "Lake Lexington" is represented!

madtony8k

April 11th, 2008, 08:34 PM

Thanks for the cool drawing. It makes a nice background :)

Did this come from an article somewhere?

madtony8k

April 11th, 2008, 09:02 PM

^^ nevermind, i found it :)

seicer

April 14th, 2008, 04:09 PM

Candidates not sold on CentrePointe (http://www.kentucky.com/779/story/375612.html)
FORUM HEARS TALK OF STRIKING BALANCE DOWNTOWN
By Greg Kocher, Herald-Leader, April 14, 2008

Candidates in three district primary races for Lexington's Urban County Council took a dim view of the $250 million CentrePointe project, and they weren't too keen on the possibility of a new downtown basketball arena, either.

During a forum Sunday at the Lexington Public Library, candidates in the primary races for Districts 3, 5 and 11 spoke of striking a balance between attracting new development downtown and preserving those attractions that give Lexington its identity.

"There's no doubt that we need development downtown but it has to be a win-win situation, where we protect our historic buildings but also get something positive for downtown," said District 3 candidate Eric Thomason. "It has to be human-scale, and CentrePointe as it stands isn't that."

Incumbent District 11 council member Peggy Henson agreed: "I can't picture something that large-scale in downtown Lexington."

The comments were made during the candidate forum sponsored by the library and the League of Women Voters.

CentrePointe would include a four-star hotel and residential condominium units in a tower taller than the "Big Blue" Lexington Financial Center. The project's success depends on tax increment financing, in which the developers recoup large portions of their investment by keeping the income and property taxes generated by the project over a 30-year period. That financing requires approval by the Urban County Council.

District 5 candidate Edward Norton III said he opposes CentrePointe and questions that financing: "The developers have made quite a bit of money here in Lexington and contributed to our community, but should we give them $70 million in tax credits?"

The most favorable comment about CentrePointe came from District 11 candidate Logan Weiler III.

"I'm kind of excited that somebody wants to invest that much in our precious Lexington," Weiler said. "Lexington is the heart of the Bluegrass. We're the jewel in the crown of the Bluegrass. And if somebody wants to build something that's going to attract a lot more people, I think it's pretty exciting."

Weiler later added: "I'm not sold one way or another on it, but I sure would like to learn more."

District 3 candidate Garry Weston said he has reservations about CentrePointe. He said he favors "appropriately sized infill development that saves our buildings, saves historic venues and maintains that culture and vitality for our area in Lexington ... like the Farmers Market and like Phoenix Park."

District 3 candidate Diane Lawless acknowledged that the community has made some downtown planning mistakes.

"And I'm hopeful that the negotiations will happen so that this (CentrePointe) project, as it moves forward, will be in keeping with what Lexington is all about."

Meanwhile, city officials said in October that Lexington is in the early stages of planning for a new basketball arena that might open in 2014 or 2015. But the council candidates said the city has more urgent priorities.

"Do we need another arena? I don't think so," said District 5 candidate Cheryl Blanton Feigel. "I think we have more pressing issues to deal with in this economic downturn. We have some major sewer and drainage issues in this city that we need to focus our energies on."

District 3 candidate Don Pratt called both Memorial Coliseum and Rupp Arena "quite functional."

"And Rupp Arena and the Civic Center have almost been a white elephant," Pratt added. "If it wasn't for the demand of the basketball fans, it would have gone down the tubes. This is the kind of back-behind-closed-doors decision-making that politically powerful interests invest in campaigns for."

Jonathan Rodgers, another District 3 candidate, said a new arena is "something that could be considered maybe in the next 20 or 30 years. Right now, it's obvious that that should be on the back burner of what's on our mind. ... It's not something that would be anywhere near the front of my mind."

District 5 candidate Richard Marrs was succinct in his opinion: "I personally think if UK wants a new arena, they really need to analyze that themselves for an on-campus arena."

And District 11 candidate Ellen Hollon said she is a Wildcats fan, but that when it comes to taxpayer dollars, there are higher priorities.

"I have season tickets. I'm clear up in the nosebleed (section). I bleed blue. I love our basketball team," she said. "But right now with the huge expenses of the storm and sanitary sewer problems we have, how can we look at" taking on such an endeavor?

The candidate forum will air on the library's Insight Cable Channel 20 before the May 20 primary election.

seicer

April 14th, 2008, 06:22 PM

Pedestrian view of CentrePointe (http://www.kentucky.com/589/story/375652.html)
ENSURE DEVELOPMENT ADDS TO STREETSCAPE
By Ned Crankshaw, a professor in the University of Kentucky landscape architecture department who specializes in urban design in historic districts. Herald-Leader, April 14, 2008

The proposed CentrePointe complex caused considerable discussion about its scale and appearance, the demolition of older buildings and the displacement of entertainment venues.

But the most important issue has been little discussed: How will the building affect the downtown street environment?

Buildings are the most important ingredients in defining streetscape quality. Their rhythms give scale to the progression of walks; their doors and windows connect interior and exterior space and activity; and signs and window displays punctuate street space. Designed open spaces make similar contributions when they are visually interesting and filled with activity.

Parking lots, parking garages (unless they have retail space on their street fronts) and inactive building facades detract from streetscape quality.

Main Street, as the longest and most important stretch of sidewalk used by pedestrians in downtown Lexington, is an instructive example by which to evaluate the contributions that the proposed building might make.

Let's begin at Quality Street and end at Broadway, staying on the same side of Main as the proposed building. The first block consists of three- and four-story buildings leading to the taller Lexington-Fayette Government Center. Windows and doors address the street. The Gray Construction building displays an active interior, others have retail displays, and the Kentucky Theatre invites pedestrians. Many storefronts are vacant, and a parking-garage entrance interrupts the walk.

This block presents a mixed level of quality, but with the potential for a more lively building edge.

On the second block, which begins at Martin Luther King Boulevard, the government annex parking garage is fronted on the street by the uninspiring Fayette County Clerk's Office, the garage's entrance and the police station. The annex is followed by the Central Library garage entrance, the library and Phoenix Park. The library gallery provides an interesting visual focus. Phoenix Park is not the most dynamic urban space, but trees, water and people provide an agreeable interlude in the street corridor.

In sum, the first half of the block is pretty grim, but the rest is markedly better.

The third block is the one to be occupied by CenterPointe. It is edged by three-and four-story buildings, one of them particularly distinguished in appearance. Five of the six wear sheet-metal slip covers over their historic facades. Only The Dame nightclub and Buster's bar address pedestrians in any meaningful way. A large parking lot interrupts the block.

Overall block quality is barely adequate, but like the first block, the existing buildings have potential to be better, and the parking area presents an infill building opportunity.

The block that begins at Upper Street starts well with 206 East Main, but pedestrian space is increasingly grim from there on. A long stretch of parking garage has multiple entrances on Main Street.

This is followed by the Lexington Financial Center's plaza, which is technically pedestrian open space. This should be a good thing, but the plaza and the building fa�ade are so cold and uninviting that they contribute little to the pedestrian experience. Most of the block is indifferent to it.

The block between Mill Street and Broadway continues the trend. An office building, a garage and a hotel complex occupy the entire block and give the street a cold shoulder.

The scale of the buildings is wide, pedestrians cannot see well into the buildings through tinted windows and there is no activity to engage people on the sidewalk. The block before was indifferent, but this one is deliberately unreceptive.

Main Street's south side is not the environment that a city's main downtown street should be. There are blocks where building rhythm and scale are good and where business development is the key to improvement. In other blocks, infill development makes sense. Building a new county clerk's office in front of the annex garage or creating retail space in the front of the Lexington Financial Center's garage are examples. In other segments we may have to live with poorly designed buildings, like the Radisson, for a long time to come.

Main Street has much room for improvement as an urban space. That improvement should be a focus of development efforts.

As citizens of Lexington debate the CentrePointe proposal, they should ask whether it will make Main Street better or worse. If it makes it better, does it do so only marginally, or does it make marked improvement? Will sidewalks be interrupted by driveways? Will the building's mass and rhythm relate to Lexington's intimate street scale? Will ground floors be occupied by a variety of businesses with windows and interior activities that are inviting to pedestrians?

The perspective image of the project shows only the Vine Street and Limestone sides of the building, leading one to wonder if Main Street gets the project's back side. The project emphatically is not infill that works around existing buildings to create a matrix of old and new architectural forms and spaces.

Beyond this, the public knows very little about the design proposal. Lexington officials are being asked to contribute tax increment financing to the project. They should consider the powerful effect, positive or negative, it will have on streetscape quality on our most important byways.

seicer

April 14th, 2008, 08:04 PM

Club owner voices concerns about project (http://www.kentucky.com/254/story/375592.html)
FEARS CITY COULD LOSE DAME, HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND HOTEL
By Beverly Fortune, Herald-Leader, April 14, 2008

CentrePointe or no CentrePointe, quickly nailing down the future of the block where a high-rise hotel is planned is critical, says the owner of The Dame.

Tom Yost, owner of the live music venue, was in Lexington last week, scoping spots where the club could move to make room for the planned high-rise that would take up an entire block of downtown. The Dame and other buildings considered historic on the block would have to come down.

But Yost said he fears "Lexington will go 0-for-3: no Dame, torn-down historic buildings and no CentrePointe."

Last month, The Dame was given 90 days to find a new home.

Yost, president of the Atlanta-based Harvester Group, said that in the next 30 days, The Dame must either find another location or try to negotiate a new short-term lease with landlord Joe Rosenberg to let The Dame stay at its Main Street location until it is certain that developer Dudley Webb has secured funding for the $250 million project and it is definitely a go.

To make the project work, Webb said CentrePointe will need $70 million in tax increment financing, a procedure that requires approval from both the Urban County Council and the state TIF Commission.

The developers of the CentrePointe hotel-condominium project have met resistance from people determined to save historic buildings and the heart of downtown nightlife.

The developers asked for a 60-day delay before presenting plans to a city board that has authority over development of part of the block, including The Dame building.

That puts Yost in a bind.

"We book bands three months in advance, so we need to know pretty soon where we're going to be," said Yost. He has looked at three locations that he declined to identify, except to say one was close to the University of Kentucky campus.

While reluctant to level criticism, Yost admitted he was baffled by the way the proposed CentrePointe was cloaked in secrecy until its official unveiling March 4.

When rumors of a development on the block first began to circulate, Yost drove up from Atlanta in October 2006 to meet with Ronald C. Tritschler, CEO of The Webb Cos. "He said not to worry, the project was dead," Yost said.

Tritschler said The Webb Cos. did not have control of all the property on the block when he met with Yost. "Without the property, the project could not go forward."

Yost said neither The Webb Cos. nor the city ever brought the affected business owners together to say, "We're not going to subject you to 18 months of rumors. Here are the plans, a timetable, and we want to help you relocate," Yost said.

Yost, who is in his 30s and has a degree in industrial management from Georgia Tech, said the way he favors finding a solution to controversy engulfing the proposed CentrePointe is for developers, historic preservationists, property owners and the small-business owners on the block to sit down together for breakfast. "By lunch, I believe we would come up with a solution that is best for the city of Lexington," he said. "That's the primary thing I'm shooting for."

The Dame opened in April 2003 and features live music most nights of the week. The last day for a live music performance is set for June 23.

Regulars at the club say it would be missed.

"The Dame is the only place that's a music venue first, a bar second," said Matt Sparks, 22. "Most other places are bars that occasionally have music."

He and friends stood outside The Dame at 10:30 p.m. recently, waiting for Sparks' band to play.

Evan Strippelhoff, 22, a University of Kentucky student, said, "I've had some amazing nights here." After midnight, there is no cover charge. "It is so packed you can barely move," he said.

Another reason Yost wants The Dame's future decided is that he is part of a group working to launch a network in Atlanta that will broadcast concerts over the Internet. "Being on computer, it will be interactive and have a worldwide audience," he said.

Organizers want the network to make its debut in four months with a live broadcast from The Dame.

"It would be a lot of fun for Lexington, give a lot of publicity to the city," Yost said. "If we have a popular show, well, look out."