In all this talk about the boarded up windows I haven't seen any mention about the painted ones. Can the new regulations be written so that such decorated ones are allowed or at least grandfathered in? To me those painted window covers look a whole lot better than the ones where there is currently glass but through the glass one can see torn and tattered shades.
Ark City needs to prohibit boarded up windows of any kind on the face or side streets of Summit Street immediately. It makes the town look really bad and we shouldn't care who it makes mad. The building owners have had plenty of time to start making changes to improve the looks and have not done it because they don't care.
Now that millions of dollars have been spent to make the downtown look good, the whole process cannot be permitted to be sabotaged by building owners who just do not care what the town looks like.
If Sybrant had done 3 windows a year he could have done his building twice over. No excuse.
Definitely no excuse for current building owners to proceed to board up new windows that have not yet been boarded up.
They should be given the following options:
Voluntarily with a deed restriction over a period of time, signed and recorded, or a regulation that makes it required by a specific cutoff date.
You can buy miniblinds for about 10 bucks at Wallyworld and there is absolutely no reason those cannot be installed.
There should be a published photo of the ones who need change, like one magazine's "remuddling" photos.
It is easy enough to fix. Maybe they need to be embarrassed into it.
Now with the waffling of the Commission, they can make a regulation that unintentionally sets a lower standard for downtown and actually makes it look worse over time.
My advice to the City Commission is to think this one through. You have a chance to fix something here. Either fix it or leave it alone.
The only part I have a problem with is requiring everyone in town to do the same. With garages, sheds, whatever.
Lowe's would have to hire more people just to keep up.
Too bad we don't have a Lowe's here in town. Has anyone thought of contacting them to see if they'd like to put a store here? Maybe we could give them a tax abatement.
Making people put windows in their storage sheds because downtown building owners neglect their maintenance is stupid and shows a lack of leadership and cojones on the part of the City Commission.
Here is what i think sounds like a good idea,, if you are unwilling to repair your building, then you must post a bond that would pay for its removal after you have neglected it to the unrepairable state, I for one do not want to see another milk plant drama unfold especialy on mainstreet. The tax payers of this fine city carried the burdon for the removal of the old milk plant on west chestnut, the owners would not maintain it and it became a dangerous structure even before it burned. These building must be inspected regulary by code enforcement some of the comments like on the front page today almost made me puke. here is the most irresponsible of them all
("Building owner Rick Rush said the profit margin downtown is slim. He said there is some pressure from the public to fix up the buildings, but added that if more people shopped with downtown businesses, they would have more money for repairs.
"You can't force your idealism on someone," he said")
enforceing building codes and preserveing History is not idealism, the application of the betterment of our community should never be viewed as Idealism
We as Citizens need to demand that our historical buildings be overseen by a shepard that will preserve our history for the generations that follow us and just ued as shelter for the pigions
do not let the Sybrants and Rick Rushs make you think that your storage shed would fall under the same regulations as a commercial historic building, it just wont fly..
Stand up City commisioners and do not slack your duty,, if you can make a homeowner remove gaffiti you can make these guys maintain their propertys as well
Hell no it's a whole lot easier to pick on a home owner. They have to live there, those folks downtown (you know who you are) will just tell the city to pound sand, they "don't like to be told to fix up their properties". Besides that they will just go home, they don't have to live in them. Maybe if they did it would be a diffrent situation. Of course I don't know, but I would be willing to wager large sums that their homes don't look anything like their buildings. the hawk
A friend of mine in Newkirk who converted a 2 story downtown sandstone corner building (like Sybrant's) into a personal residence recommended Larry Golightly in Winfield as a window contractor. He said about $200.00 per.
There is no Doubt that there will be a great cost involved,, my thoughts are how did you get yourself in the ownership of a building you cannot aford to maintain????
My guess is you can aford it you just prefur to not do it
Most of the down town buildings in AC. were built by our Grand fathers or Great Grandfathers. In the past 50 years all that has been done is to use them for the rent that can be collected, and very little repair has been done to most of them. If code enforcement can get on home owners for infractions on their property, the same should apply to the down-town bulding owners only more so because of the exposure to the public,as well as keeping the face of the town up. (The chickens, or in this case the pidgeons have come home to roost). I think that most of us in this community want to do what is right, but there has always been a double standard here. It's up to the City Commission to stick to their guns and make the rules apply to everybody. After all any community is what one will make of it, and if the main street looks like its old and run down, the rest is assumed to be the same.
Fudd your first post was absolutely perfect in every aspect, welcome to the board, I am very dissapointed in the current administration,, but that is what you get when you mix business with politics,, City comissioners should be homegrown blue collar regular guys not egotistical business owners who get another comissioner to agree with them by promising to vote for their pet project when it comes along,, WE need to oust these guys and get the original three amigos in along with Becky Bruton, who had more Cahoneies than any of the current slackers/////\
They very carefully stood at the barn door and made sure every single horse had escaped the corral and run away, and then made a big deal about shutting the door and closing the corral gate. They then proclaimed "that won't ever happen again" or something about like that. I think it was the corral gate will be "air-tight"
It is my understanding the Commissioners are very pleased about the "progress".
So far nothing has been done regarding the buildings downtown that look like crap. No action at all. I'll bet they just wait for AC to "forget" about it and just sweep it under the big rug where everything else has gone. Everybody it is supposed to affect will be grandfathered.
When the Commission makes a motion, you can be sure it is just that: a motion.
By the way. Don't look now, but the Schmidts have won. Lucky them. Stupid us.
Just in case there might be additional horses in the corral, we will open the gate, but just this once (or twice or three times if necessary... certainly no more than 50 times)...
From the paper:
"For now, any kind of covering is acceptable in the historical district as long as it seals the window from pests and birds."
If there are any more Schmidts downtown, theys better gets busy, because the gate will close soon. Well pretty soon, maybe. Or not.
Kuhn says the ordinance will be "air-tight".
What ordinance? At the end of the day, did anything change?
Actually, I'm suprised building owners are getting away with tin. From what little I have read, there are standards which have to be upheld for them to qualify as a historical district.
