Showing posts with label North Annex. Show all posts
Showing posts with label North Annex. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Doom and gloom beneath the rotted kitchen formica as city, county agree to demolish the North Annex.



Actually, they didn't agree -- yet, but it's looking like a done deal. I'd much rather save the Annex and demolish Wal-Mart; after all, the 800-zillion pound gorilla's ten years probably is approaching, signalling a move to Edwardsville or Birdseye.

New Albany hopes to develop pool at Community Park; Floyd County to keep sports center in agreement reached Tuesday, by Daniel Suddeath (That 'Bama Show)

New Albany will be responsible for the costs of building, maintaining and operating the aquatic center if it comes to fruition. An important side note to the agreement is that the city and county would jointly split the costs to demolish any structures on the property necessary to construct the aquatic center.

Demolition could include the North Annex building, which has been vacant since the Floyd County Youth Shelter and solid waste office moved to the Pine View Government Center.

A plan and statement released by the city and county Tuesday didn’t include exact details for demolitions or construction of the aquatic center. The plan did specify the division of parks equipment and property.

There's an interesting addendum within Grace Schneider's C-J coverage:

 ... The deal also calls for the city to “provide support of the county’s proposed public plaza concept near the aquatic center on the existing annex property at Sam Peden.

Obviously, we can kiss the Annex goodbye. Too bad that somewhere, tacked on the pool and baseball field bonds, there isn't a spare million or so not otherwise allotted for maintenance of Bob Caesar's driveway up Silver Hills that we might use to complete a few streets.

Sunday, September 30, 2012

The Annex remains a litmus test for local political Philistines.

From Chuck's historic "society" through Seabrook's "limbo," those of our elected officials who routinely treat creativity as though it were the latest incarnation of Ebola provide an illustration of the "leadership" vacuum in this county.

Floyd County's North Annex future in question; Building will be shuttered Oct. 15, by Chris Morris ('Bama Pop-Up Generator)

 ... “We have given the preservation group a lot of time and nothing has come to fruition. We have to decide if we want to keep it or demolish it,” said Commissioners’ President Steve Bush. “We’ve been talking about this since we were talking about building a new youth shelter. I do not think the county has any plans to put offices out there. I think we have done our due diligence.”

Saturday, August 27, 2011

Moss: "Community Park is under attack, by (Scott) Klink’s reckoning."

Earlier this week, Dale Moss picks up where my recent column, ON THE AVENUES: The usual suspects, and a future held hostage, left off.

Scott Klink's defining moment for Floyd County

Does Floyd County have enough park land? Can it have enough? Scott Klink is certain of the answers.

He feels fairly sure of yours, as well.

In any event, Klink wants to believe that people believe a county must be more than its storefronts. Business matters but so does getting away from business. Klink asks that his county believe it is high time — the clock ticks — to stand up for a better quality of life.

“It’s not about taxes and revenue all the time,” Klink said. “At some point, it needs to be about what’s good for people.”

The county is considering the future of land on and around its to-be-shuttered annex — its one-time poor house — on Grant Line Road. Options seem to include selling some, most or perhaps all of what Klink said totals 18 acres.

Klink is involved officially as president of the New Albany-Floyd County Parks Board, which operates Sam Peden Community Park right behind the annex. He is involved unofficially as a citizen who, when traveling, marvels at how well some places make the most of nature. They appreciate that more and more pavement is not the only sign of progress. Anyway, Community Park is under attack, by Klink’s reckoning.

Thursday, August 18, 2011

ON THE AVENUES: The usual suspects, and a future held hostage.

ON THE AVENUES: The usual suspects, and a future held hostage.

By ROGER BAYLOR
Local Columnist

Community Park Developers LLC’s plans would include the entire 18-acre tract. James L. Shireman, Larry Timperman and John W. Lopp make up Community Park Developers. The three propose that their development would create 520 jobs, provide about $100,000 in tax revenue for the county each year and as much as $1 million or more after all lots are sold.
-- News and Tribune

520 jobs at a strip mall, generating only $100,000?

Am I supposed to laugh, or cry?

Hello?

There are the times when you look at the acreage and occupants comprising the places where you live and work, and you say to yourself (but only after a snort of very strong drink): Seriously, the only thing that can possibly explain this degree of absurdity is an overall genetic deficiency.

Truly, it must be something in the water.

As my blogging colleague Bluegill noted yesterday, it’s the usual suspects, all the way across the board.

It’s the same so-called thinking downtown (River View, anyone?), as the same purported thinking along the Grant Line corridor, to the effect that the same exurban developers, and the same feather-bedded architects, make a proposal to the same tired political functionaries, the latter representing the same two clueless political power-sharers, and we decide, without voting, to chew up and spit out some of the last remaining green space inside the beltway for the same short-term development to benefit the same inveterate, eternal, close-minded small-timers as always.

Yes, there is another proposal on the table, and it would protect a portion of the open character of the land. Label me unimpressed, because two options are two options: Black, or white. This, or that. Democrat, or Republican. Does anyone have a bucket?

Moreover, given the almost laughable non-choice being offered, why am I the one declared “toxic” for asking questions like this one: Why can’t there be a third option that calls for leaving the space clean and green, at a time when we continue to battle the storm-water implications of rampant pavement?

Why must there be another parking lot?

---

I believe that in large measure, the current New Albany-Floyd County Parks Board has the best interest of Floyd County’s park system in mind. I accept that high on its list of priorities is preserving the territorial integrity of the existing parks. When Scott Klink, the board’s president, and other correspondents say they do not favor yielding park lands to variously conjectured proposals for sale and development, I take their protestations at face value, even as I cock an eyebrow and wonder if a future Little League baseball complex is their ultimate goal for Community Park.

I like baseball, but doubt if that’s the answer, either.

But it is a measure of the suspicion and non-transparency enveloping this topic that in defense of its laudable goals, the Parks Board chose its own somewhat less than transparent strategy during the most recent state legislative session, by persuading State Representative Ed Clere to introduce a parks district law behind the backs of the city’s and county’s elected officials.

Such a district would take the county’s parks entirely out of the jurisdiction of elected officials, as well as provide funding from tax revenues outside the reach of their grasping hands.

And yet, the parks district surprise attack may have seemed like the only viable option available to the Parks Board, given persistent insinuations (some would say, “threats”) made by certain elected officials whose names begin with Ted to the effect that lacking the political courage to tax the populace, they’d happily develop parklands to resolve short-term funding problems.

When the county’s planner, Don Lopp, began running interference for his paymasters in recent comments right here at this blog, the course became considerably more obvious. I’d say Lopp’s circuitous logic surely outed the political Philistines in the county, except there was no need for outing; they’d have sold the Community Park frontage already if the recession hadn’t intervened, and have said so often enough.

We’d have another dollar store, another chain restaurant, and another flea market, sans any commensurate uptick in political courage on the part of our masters … except that they’re no masters of mine, and it saying so aloud makes me toxic, then so be it.

---

In the end, amid the lies, threats and unreconstructed, pure dullness of the folks we’ve elected to chart the future, there finally is revealed an instance when Ed Clere might have been of some use to the citizenry.

Rather than same armchairs in the back room, he might have expended mere farthings of his voluminous political capital, gone to the residents of the county with the case for a “pledge” on the part of elected officials in New Albany and Floyd County, and made the case that “green” is a unifying theme.

Something like this:

“We recognize the value of green space, and will eschew short term gains by observing the long term benefits of our parks. The territorial integrity of the NA-FC parks system will be preserved, even as we seek to expand these boundaries.”

Or something like that. Alas, even if Rep. Clere had taken the high road, I can no easier imagine either Doug England or Ted Heavrin saying these words than I can picture me drinking an ice-cold Miller Lite.

The mayor would flip Valley View at the drop of a hat, and Heavrin, the county council president for life, reappointed to office after electoral defeat by a party hierarchy that lives in the 1940’s, would do the same with the Community Park frontage.

I don’t mind pointing it out: Damn, we’re dumbasses here in New Albany and Floyd County. It is really in the water, or is there something we can do about it?

Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Two new park proposals but a common theme.

Two pitches: one from a non-profit that would preserve some of the green space and the other from a developer that would install a strip center and other accoutrements of decay.

Design details are lacking in News and Tribune and Courier coverage thus far but I was struck by the inclusion of one particular name: Larry Timperman. Timperman is one the usual suspect architects hired for seemingly every public job in the area, including advising the County on the potential reuses of the annex building. End result? A proposal to make money for his own LLC.

Sound familiar? Sound like River View? Sound like every day in the open air museum?

It's time for the super self-interested to be identified as such rather than treated as allies to the public interest.

Candidates, are you listening?

Two submit proposals for New Albany's North Annex, by Chris Morris (News and Tribune).

Family Scholar House and Community Park Developers LLC both want to acquire all or part of the 18 acres surrounding the North Annex along Grant Line Road, which currently houses the Floyd County Youth Shelter.

It will be up to the Floyd County Commissioners and Floyd County Council to make the final decision.

Floyd County Planner Don Lopp presented the two proposals to the commissioners Tuesday evening. No action was taken and Mark Seabrook, president of the commissioners, said there would be public meetings before a decision was made.

Thursday, August 11, 2011

JAY-sus, can we please have leadership for 2011, not 1961?

Here's Floyd County Council retro pasha Ted Heavrin on the best future of the Annex, sidestepping yet again the possibility he most desires, that of chewing up and spitting out 18 acres of Community Park at the behest of the Philistines, because after all, why not let planner Don Lopp speak for the Council instead of the ones who for some unknown reason were elected to office?

"I’ve always talked about (how) that would make a great place for senior housing” or student housing because the site is directly across the street from Walmart and near movie theaters and other commercial development, Heavrin said.
Is it any wonder that local Republicans and Democrats are indistinguishable? Go and get your cleanest dirty barf bags, and read more of Harold Adams's article here.

Monday, August 08, 2011

County planner asks: What are your thoughts on the Annex building's future?

In recent weeks, Don Lopp, the Director of Operations and County Planning in Floyd County, has twice joined the blog discussion about the future of Community Park and the North Annex.

July 31: Community Park, North Annex, development and the fog of political obfuscation.

July 15: "Is Floyd County seeking to develop up to 18 acres of Community Park?"
NAC appreciates his willingness to participate, and so I'm moving his most recent posting to the marquee in hopes of continuing the chat. First, I wrote this:

The Annex occupies a very small part of up to 18 acres. The very best idea for these acres is the only one I'm not hearing: Keep them green ... and that's a direct result of the Philistine proclivities of the dudes who sign Don's check.
Don's response:

I appreciate the forum and the response regarding the alternative of keeping the frontage entirely green. I would like to continue the dialogue if I could by asking your thoughts on the annex building. Thanks for the discussion.
Readers, what are your thoughts on the Annex building, and by extension, the topics considered in the ongoing Community Park thread?

Friday, August 05, 2011

Nash: "A little bit of hodge podge."

From the controversy at 8th and Culbertson, to the future of the North Annex and Community Park's threatened green space, and back to State Street improvements, sans bike lanes ... Matt covers much ground in today's column, and ties it together in the end.

NASH: A little bit of hodge podge

One of the problems I have is that I may have an opinion on any number of topics every week, I just don’t always have enough to say about it that could fill an entire column. This is one of those weeks. Sometimes I hope by the end of the article that I can tie everything together but we’ll just see how it goes.

Sunday, July 31, 2011

Community Park, North Annex, development and the fog of political obfuscation.

OSIN's Chris Morris braves the eternal glower of the county council's prez-for-life to report this story:

No decision yet on North Annex future; NA-FC Parks Department wants Community Park to remain intact

... Ted Heavrin, president of the county council, said no decision has been made about the property’s future. He said the layout of the area will limit development.

“You can’t build under power lines ... they should know that,” Heavrin said of the parks board.

Heavrin said before anything is decided, all parties involved will have a meeting.
Sound familiar? That's because we were discussing it on July 15: Is Floyd County seeking to develop up to 18 acres of Community Park? The discussion rather prematurely ended with this comment from Jeff Gillenwater.

I appreciate your time, Don (Lopp), but that really doesn't answer my question. You mentioned that the original thought was to make 4-6 acres available but that preservationists requested an expansion to 18 acres.

Why? What is someone going to do with 18 acres that they couldn't do with 4-6? Is there an entity proposing something specific that requires more land? What thinking led to the expanded offering?

Given their abysmal communication record lately, it would be helpful for the public to know what's happening on the preservation front *before* any governmental commitments are made.

So, what's really happening? Give that wheel a spin, will ya?

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Beyond repair?

In today's Tribune, the paper's editorial board offers an opinion on the progress (or lack thereof) of a new Floyd County Youth Shelter. Fair enough. Included in that piece, however, is the conclusion that the county's North Annex, currently utilized as the shelter, "has deteriorated beyond repair."

While I can understand suggesting that the Annex may not be the most suitable structure for a youth shelter, the above pronouncement suggests that the building retains no utility at all and should be torn down. Given that I don't remember (and can't seem to find) any Tribune report that documents any serious, "unrepairable" structural deficiencies putting the building at risk of collapse or presenting the building as an irremediable danger to the public, I find it puzzling that the board would find it necessary to make such a pronouncement as part of an argument for an alternative youth shelter location.

If anyone can point to Tribune reporting that provides evidence in support of a "beyond repair" claim, I'd appreciate it. Otherwise, what gives?

Monday, November 16, 2009

Gonder: "It's really always about the future."

County officials can't see the long-term for their own absence of creativity ...

North Annex: Either a strip mine or pawn shop mentality on the part of Floyd County's officialdom.

... While at-large city council member John Gonder eloquently reminds me of why I voted for him:

Just Wondering

The long view need not cause a burden for us in the here and now. A short term gain from a sale of property will not have a sizable impact on the City's finances for more than a couple quarters, while ongoing ownership will produce continual, though lower in the short run, dependable funds which will support City services year in and year out. More importantly, we can make decisions today which will benefit not just ourselves but those who follow us, so those who attend the Quadra (?) centennial celebration will have something valuable to pass on to their heirs.

Sunday, November 15, 2009

North Annex: Either a strip mine or pawn shop mentality on the part of Floyd County's officialdom.

Interconnectivity in today's Tribune:

Sekula pushing for local historic preservation group (Daniel Suddeath)

Appraisals for North Annex lowered (Chris Morris)

While Greg Sekula rallies the preservationists, elected officials like Larry McAllister and Ted Heavrin (both county councilmen, and evidently registered as "Democrat" in that peculiar local "well, not really" sort of way) rarely make it through a news cycle without providing more evidence for the need to rally the preservationists.

So, how much is the North Annex (as a historic structure) and the open land around it really worth?

Heavrin and his ilk say that greenbacks are the only determining factor, but of course they lack the simple courage to fairly consider, much less implement, a LOIT tax, one that might relieve the immediate need to sell off what few assets remain available to them before it can be determined whether the building and property might be worth even more as an adaptive reuse that incorporates the surrounding green space in some fashion that approximates 2009, not their preferred milieu of 1947.

Sekula's troops obviously disagree, and I tend to side with them. Some people see a tree as something to be felled and sold, while others view the woods as a place worth something in and of itself. Same goes for a building. The biggest considerations in the future of the North Annex site are how proposed development pertains to environmental matters (i.e., run-off from the asphalt twinkling in Heavrin's eyes) and the relationship of the site to Community Park.

Sell off the North Annex property and the money's gone. We'll be back to where we started, and still without a revenue stream for future needs. Use it to enhance the quality of life, and it may provide what amounts to an annuity. Accordingly, Morris quotes Heavrin: “But like everything it comes down to money.”

Wrong.

There are times when it comes down to creativity and thinking outside the box, and Heavrin stands as a prime example of how our county council fails that test.

Friday, June 27, 2008

From North Carolina to Grant Line Road in ten not so easy elected officials.

Yesterday’s “New Life for Old Factories” presentation in Madison was highly informative, and well attended by New Albanians (six of us, I believe). To make a long story short, North Carolina is ahead of the pack when it comes to offering tax incentives and other inducements for those seeking to develop archaic factories, mill buildings, schools and public utility structures into newly usable revenue generators.

The results are stunning.

Indiana may lag behind, and one wonders why our governor did not accompany his Major Moves program with North Carolinian-style carrots/incentives for adaptive reuse of what we already have, but no matter.

Creative solutions actually do exist in Indiana, although you wouldn’t know it by observing the actions of Floyd County’s commissioners and council, our two governing entities, who continue to insist that the only way of improving the historic County Home (North Annex) building on Grant Line Road is to demolish it, ostensibly to allow the contemporary institutional, er, “grandeur” of its Timpermanesque replacement to be seen from the egalitarian confines of the Wal-Mart parking lot.

Speaking of lowest common denominators, currently the county’s leadership cadre doesn’t have the money to do even that, short of sending orange-festooned jailbirds with hammers to begin chipping away in the fashion of the Berlin Wall’s demise, or indulging in the time-honored local solution of summarily torching the edifice (moving the Youth Shelter kids away to a tent city first, of course), and this constitutes a rarely fortunate turn of events stemming from Indiana’s property tax class warfare.

Perhaps a thought process (is that legal?) somewhat removed from used car sales Philistinism will yet prevail, sensible options for adaptive reuse will be considered, and progress in the North Carolina sense -- savor the irony in that analogy -- might yet blossom right here in the domain of the Open Air Museum of Ignorance, Superstition and Backwardness.

Meanwhile, before anyone jumps in here to passionately defend the Youth Shelter, let’s be clear about the gist. I'm for the Youth Shelter. My comments here are not about the Youth Shelter, not about its employees, and not about its inhabitants.

To my knowledge, there is nothing in the mandate of the Youth Shelter that says a historic building should be thoughtlessly demolished when all available facts suggest it is cheaper to renovate such a structure than to build a new one. Throughout the previous months of this discussion, council, commissioners and Youth Shelter supporters alike have consistently sought to shift the conversation away from the merits of County Home reuse to the emotional insinuation that anyone opposing the politicos’ shortsighted “resolve” is guilty of ignoring, rejecting and detesting troubled kids.

No, it isn’t, that particular argument is flagrantly invalid, and the people advancing it need to become better actors.

As with most other political failings locally, the suggested fate of the County Home has far less to do with thoughtful future planning than it does with an abject and egregious absence of imagination on the part of elected officials. Once a historical building is gone, it’s gone for good, but imagination somehow continues to cling to survival hereabouts -- if only it might be acknowledged and nurtured.

Ironically, the clients of the Youth Shelter might have a better grasp of imagination, creativity and adaptive solutions owing to their own unfortunate circumstances than the generally well-meaning adults who insist on skewing the argument illogically. That's too bad.

In the archives:

NAC: Sekula on the North Annex: "Clarify and frame this discussion and ensure that it is portrayed accurately."

NAC: New thread: North Annex, preservationists, youth shelter advocates and ... and ...

NAC: North Annex? It's time to address Floyd County's political culture and its congenital cultural amnesia.

And: Bass Ackward (Diggin’ in the Dirt blog)

---

Photo credit: Floyd County Historical Association

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Bush, Seabrook do the funky McAllister, vote to proceed with demolition of North Annex.

I can't say it better, so why try?

Bass Ackward, by New Alb Annie at Diggin in the Dirt.

Maybe one day our elected officials will try to take all the needs of a community into account, but it didn't happen last night at the Floyd County Commissioners meeting.

Instead of engaging local preservationists at the outset, when talks about demolishing the historically significant North Annex began, the Commissioners and County Council chose to ignore expressed concerns by failing to respond to letters addressing the matter.

Oh, well. I suppose we get what we vote for.


Here's C-J coverage last night's Philistine confab. Props to my old teammate Charles Freiberger for at least grasping the utility of amassing as much information as possible before making a key decision. That counts for something, I suppose.

Leveling of Floyd annex is approved

Rejecting a request from preservationists to study whether the county's 130-year-old North Annex building can be renovated, the Floyd County commissioners voted 2-1 last night to proceed with plans that include tearing it down.

(Photo credit: Floyd County Historical Society)

Thursday, January 31, 2008

New thread: North Annex, preservationists, youth shelter advocates and ... and ...

In the thread at Sekula on the North Annex: "Clarify and frame this discussion and ensure that it is portrayed accurately," NAC's Bluegill wrote:

One negative consequence of tying the youth shelter to demolition is that it unnecessarily pits two proactive, positive groups against each other.

The youth shelter folks have undoubtedly advocated long and hard for improved conditions, and rightfully so. What they've been told is that tearing down the county home is the ONLY way to get it.

It's created another fight where there really is none.

---

Precisely. And who is encouraging this fight where none should be?

The County Commissioners and the County Council, both of whom are pushing the youth shelter advocates forward and changing the topic in the process.

In the used car biz, don't they call that a bait and switch?

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Sekula on the North Annex: "Clarify and frame this discussion and ensure that it is portrayed accurately."

Greg Sekula, director of the Southern Regional Office of the Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana, contributed the following to the Tribune as a guest column. It appears today. We're reprinting the piece in its entirety.

----

As has recently been reported in the media, a group of concerned citizens of Floyd County has expressed a desire to investigate the option of saving the historic two story section of the former Floyd County Home on Grant Line Road. This group has dubbed itself “The Friends of the Floyd County Home” and continues to grow in numbers as this issue garners increased public attention.

In response to the numerous articles and the Jan. 27, 2008, letter to the editor written by Pam Prince, president of Floyd County Youth Services Advisory Board, I think it is imperative that a number of points be addressed to clarify and frame this discussion and ensure that it is portrayed accurately from our viewpoint:

1. The concern for saving the former Floyd County Home is not an 11th hour revelation on the part of preservationists. The issue was raised by the New Albany Preservation Commission and Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana in letters written August 20, 2004, and May 16, 2005, respectively. The concerns went unheeded by county officials who claim that they had no knowledge of community interest in preserving the building.

2. Advocates for saving the historic building are not advocating for continued use of the annex as the youth shelter. We see the merits of constructing a new facility that is more conducive to modern day living accommodations. Our group, however, does desire to have our county officials sincerely study the costs involved in retaining the main historic sections of the former county home and utilizing this structurally sound building for office uses related to support services for the youth shelter operations or other functions as deemed fit by the county. If this option has indeed been studied, then as taxpayers of Floyd County, we respectfully request an opportunity to review those studies, including the cost estimates developed.

3. Larry McAllister, County Council President, acknowledged at a Jan. 22 site visit of the annex that there is not a statutory requirement that counties provide a youth shelter. Mr. McAllister explained that the County is providing this service to Floyd and surrounding counties because there is a recognized need for this service and the shelter creates a revenue stream for the county. Given this reality and the fact that citizens are today faced with property tax uncertainty, it is important to acknowledge that the citizens of Floyd County are being asked to support and ultimately pay for a $10 million dollar capital project that is not a required function of county government.

4. It has been stated that the existing building will likely remain standing until the new building is finished and ready for occupancy. Thus, it appears that there is time to further study re-use of this building without necessarily impacting the construction schedule of the shelter. Given what we have seen of the proposed campus plan for the annex site, it appears that the footprint of the two story section of the historic county home is outside the footprint of the proposed youth shelter building and the associated parking lot. Retention of the two story sections of the original building (main central block and wings) will undoubtedly necessitate some site plan and engineering adjustments to the campus plan. However, we would contend that such costs are potentially minimal when compared to the cost of demolishing a usable building that can continue to serve the people of Floyd County.

5. Demolition costs of the annex are conservatively estimated to be in the neighborhood of $120,000. - that is $120,000 of tax payers’ money. Could this money not be put toward the rehabilitation of this piece of our history? The demolition cost does not factor in the cost of improvements already made to the building in recent years, at tax payers’ expense, which would be wasted through demolition, nor the additional strain on our landfill that the demolition debris would provide.

In order to accurately determine the feasibility of retaining and rehabilitating portions of the county home for office use to equip our county leaders with the best information to make a fiscally responsible decision, it will be necessary to study the approach that I have outlined. Our group would like to hire an architect from outside the area to evaluate our recommended approach. The County’s cooperation in providing access to all relevant studies, reports, plans, financing, and cost estimates that have been prepared at taxpayer expense in connection with this project is needed. Additionally, access to the building by the selected architect must be granted so a rehabilitation assessment can be made. Cooperation and assistance from the County’s hired architect is also necessary to share any relevant information with the consultant architect. If the County is agreeable to this approach, The Friends of the Floyd County Home intend to pursue independent funds to cover the cost of this study without asking the county to contribute financially to the investigation.

I would, however, ask our county officials to approach the study with an open mind and to be willing to re-consider the fate of this piece of Floyd County’s heritage if the facts and figures demonstrate that retention of the building is a fiscally prudent and feasible option.

--Greg Sekula

----

Other links:

Diggin' in the Dirt: 7 Million Dollars

Tribune guest column by Vincent Klein: Floyd County reader believes now is the time to proceed on youth shelter

NA Confidential: North Annex? It's time to address Floyd County's political culture and its congenital cultural amnesia.

Monday, January 28, 2008

North Annex? It's time to address Floyd County's political culture and its congenital cultural amnesia.

The North Annex on Grant Line Road, current home of the Floyd County Youth Shelter, is in the news – and rightly so, if you ask me.

Every time I visit my mother in Georgetown, I drive past the despoiled site of the Collins-Yenawine house. The structure’s sad destruction at the hands of an arsonist in what remains a ludicrously “unsolved” case vibrantly illustrates an entrenched attitude of destructive and oft times condescending Philistinism toward our area’s past.*

It’s just my opinion, and no one’s put me up to saying it aloud – but this sort of “Groundhog Day” cultural amnesia in Floyd Couty should be addressed just as vigorously as racism, sexism and other manifestations of violence against people, especially when it occurs among elected officials, whom we ostensibly trust to discern higher community bars than that typically defining those who are in it for the money alone.

If you are inferring from these words that I believe the overall stance of certain local public officials in the matter of the North Annex to have been one analogous to Philistinism, then you are quite correct.

Numerous red herrings are being tossed liberally in all directions, among them the fraudulent charge that preservationists care more about buildings than kids (the Youth Shelter might plausibly ask why it has taken this long for government attention to be paid to its efforts), and my own personal favorite, the bromide most often deployed by used car salesman, who assure you that demolition offers “absolutely the best deal in town.”

Perhaps. It also might be the case that on a corridor blighted by Wal-Mart, we're missing another prime example of the high cost of low price.

Following are excerpts from three recent Tribune articles, all written by Chris Morris, that tell the story of an effort to raise consciousness about the North Annex.

----

Retired teacher hopes to save North Annex

Vic Megenity remembers how the old Floyd County courthouse and post office were torn down to make room for new structures he called unsightly.

He doesn’t want to see the same thing happen to the North Annex along Grant Line Road.

Group makes pitch to save North Annex along Grant Line Road

Larry McAllister had heard enough. As a group of local historians and representatives from the Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana discussed ways to save the old North Annex, home of the Floyd County Youth Shelter, McAllister quickly interrupted.

“I’m not here to make any enemies, but this is so frustrating,” said McAllister, Floyd County Council president. “It’s like all of a sudden this is being brought up. I’ve been at this four years ... I hope you understand how I feel.”

With that, McAllister left the Tuesday meeting at the North Annex, which had been organized by retired educator Vic Megenity, vice president of the Floyd County Historical Society.


Floyd County leaders asked their opinion on saving North Annex

The youth shelter has been housed at the North Annex, 3005 Grant Line Road in New Albany, since 1982. However, the building was constructed in 1878 and wings were added to the structure in 1939.

The Floyd County Commissioners, along with the County Council, approved a plan last year to build a new youth shelter on the same land and tear down the North Annex once construction is completed.

However, questions have been raised in recent weeks about the history of the North Annex, which is the only historical building left along Grant Line Road, according to Vic Megenity, vice president of the Floyd County Historical Society.


----

Readers may debate the merits of the case at their leisure, but there is one point that should be made clearly and loudly.

There is ample documentary evidence that local historical preservationists were seeking to make their opinions on the future of the Annex known through letters to Floyd County Council members and Commissioners as early as August, 2004, and into May, 2005.

You will note that the vote on the North Annex’s future occurred last year, which if memory serves, was 2007.

Do the math, Mr. McAllister. Neither has this issue come up at the last minute, nor was its mention restricted to personal communications.

A better question: Why weren't you paying attention when it did arise?

---

* Props to First Harrison Bank, which proposes to reconstruct the some semblance of the house as part of ongoing development at the site.