Walt we all understand your concerns aboud ADA compliance and the costs, you have a great insight into the different services needed, but that just all comes down to money and manpower. What the real question is here is servibability, SAVE this building, by using it for local services money that the city wants to spend in new construction can be utilized to both ends, add so called needed space for local government and save an HISTORIC and landmark building. As for the reader who thought our African American residents would like to see it torn down as a bad memory of servitude I’m sure I could think of a dozen buildings I have worked in and collected a salery from that I would like to see distroyed.It is inconveivable to me that if the city wants to save this landmark building that they can’t find a very viable use for it maybe if we put a moratorium on building for the city govenment they would be more than happy to use the space if they need new facilities so desperatly. I have been in the business of converting food and dairy plants to new process’s and uses and I have never seen a project stopped if a customer really wanted it.
I’m not concerned about ADA, fire protection systems, various building code requirements et al that may be required, depending on the future use of Harder Hall. I only mentioned it as some folks (at this forum and in the papers, etc. suggesting of sorts of desirable uses of the building) may not be aware of the additional costs required/mandated since the time the building was last used. Hence, these costs would have to be factored in and have a bearing on what use would be profitable.
That being said, I would like to see Harder Hall preserved, at least on the exterior. I’m not trying to throw cold water/wet blanket on anything, just pointing out realities. Where there’s a will there’s a way, as the old cliche goes.
