Genny's Diner: There is no diner there

I just wish Genny's Diner was on 4th street, then Mayor Abramson could have given
Farris the $900,000 forgivable loan and this may have never happened

Great point, it's certainly more of a Louisville landmark than anything that has been built at 4th street!

I just wish Genny's Diner was on 4th street, then Mayor Abramson could have given
Farris the $900,000 forgivable loan and this may have never happened

Didn't meet the requirements. Genny's was locally owned.

I just wish Genny's Diner was on 4th street, then Mayor Abramson could have given
Farris the $900,000 forgivable loan and this may have never happened

Didn't meet the requirements. Genny's was locally owned.

Good point. The mayor for too long did enjoy sending my money to Baltimore.

I was unhappy to see Flabby's go. I was very upset to see Mazzoni's go. I remember fondly the old Hearthstone Tavern. When the he old Essex House was torn down it was a real loss to Louisville not only as a landmark.but for some the very definition of what "restaurant" meant. I will not miss Genny's. It was a filthy restaurant for which even the owners never cared for lest they would have at least kept it clean. Farris seems to care naught about historical charm or preservation or anything except a very quick buck. If he had in the very least strived to keep his restaurant clean (never mind updated) I might feel differently. Comfy Cow will put in a property that will at least be cared for. and not be a hugh roach motel.

I think some people are missing the point of those of us wanted Genny's Diner saved are trying to make. We don't want it saved how it was or for the same operator (Farris) to operate it. What we want saved is the building itself! It is historical and certainly fewer like it exist than the house next door! I personally would have liked to see the Diner building turned into the ice cream shop and the house into the offices. Now the diner is gone and the house while saved will be significantly modified to allow for the ice cream shop so in reality neither one were saved historically!

I think some people are missing the point of those of us wanted Genny's Diner saved are trying to make. We don't want it saved how it was or for the same operator (Farris) to operate it. What we want saved is the building itself! It is historical and certainly fewer like it exist than the house next door! I personally would have liked to see the Diner building turned into the ice cream shop and the house into the offices. Now the diner is gone and the house while saved will be significantly modified to allow for the ice cream shop so in reality neither one were saved historically!

+1

I think some people are missing the point of those of us wanted Genny's Diner saved are trying to make. We don't want it saved how it was or for the same operator (Farris) to operate it. What we want saved is the building itself! It is historical and certainly fewer like it exist than the house next door! I personally would have liked to see the Diner building turned into the ice cream shop and the house into the offices. Now the diner is gone and the house while saved will be significantly modified to allow for the ice cream shop so in reality neither one were saved historically!

If you want to save buildings on the basis of them being old and uncommon, start your own preservation association. I can see how saving the house makes sense as the house is a historical period piece representing both a known architectural movement and a once prominent era in our city's history. I'm struggling to find an argument to save the diner aside from it's "old" and "rare." (And thank God for that!).

So, I'm not missing the point. I just don't buy it is a sound argument.

I've been lost through out the entire thread. Apparently property rights have limited meaning - the "community" can decide for you what you can and can't do. So much for ownership.

I've been lost through out the entire thread. Apparently property rights have limited meaning - the "community" can decide for you what you can and can't do. So much for ownership.

We live in a community. We all are, or should be, concerned with the common good: a specific "good" that is shared and beneficial for all (or most) members of a given community. We don't all get to decide on our own what the common good is in every situation, however.

I've been lost through out the entire thread. Apparently property rights have limited meaning - the "community" can decide for you what you can and can't do. So much for ownership.

So you oppose zoning laws, property upkeep laws, noise ordinances, etc.?

I think I am going to go construct a well-illuminated ferris wheel on my property and only run it between 2 and 4 am. And because all my focus will be on my ferris wheel (I'll be dreaming about it when I'm not running it), I'll stop cutting my grass. Soon it will be eight feet tall with rats, and snakes, and the like. But I'll still have my Ferris Wheel. And ain't nobody gonna tell me when to run my Ferris Wheel or when to cut my grass, because it is my own damn property. Mine! All Mine!

I've been lost through out the entire thread. Apparently property rights have limited meaning - the "community" can decide for you what you can and can't do. So much for ownership.

So you oppose zoning laws, property upkeep laws, noise ordinances, etc.?

I think I am going to go construct a well-illuminated ferris wheel on my property and only run it between 2 and 4 am. And because all my focus will be on my ferris wheel (I'll be dreaming about it when I'm not running it), I'll stop cutting my grass. Soon it will be eight feet tall with rats, and snakes, and the like. But I'll still have my Ferris Wheel. And ain't nobody gonna tell me when to run my Ferris Wheel or when to cut my grass, because it is my own damn property. Mine! All Mine!

Of course not - but maybe a pig farm?

Don't conflate zoning with historical preservation.

Near as I can tell, That part of Frankfort Avenue is zoned for commercial use. If that is indeed the case, destruction of that house in favor of a parking lot or other commercial structure is allowed. Reports that a destruction permit had been previously granted tends to confirm this.

The truth is that the house was declared a historical landmark to subvert the zoning laws. The whole process is capricious and arbitrary. At least with zoning changes, existing uses are grandfathered. Having your property declared "historical" is tantamount to illegal taking.

Don't conflate zoning with historical preservation.

Near as I can tell, That part of Frankfort Avenue is zoned for commercial use. If that is indeed the case, destruction of that house in favor of a parking lot or other commercial structure is allowed. Reports that a destruction permit had been previously granted tends to confirm this.

The truth is that the house was declared a historical landmark to subvert the zoning laws. The whole process is capricious and arbitrary. At least with zoning changes, existing uses are grandfathered. Having your property declared "historical" is tantamount to illegal taking.

Thanks - this was my point.

Having your property declared "historical" is tantamount to illegal taking.

No, it isn't; not at all.

I cannot speak for Tim and Roy (the owners of Comfy Cow), but Roy is a friend and the initial intention was to use the diner for the ice cream shop and the house as offices. I imagine something in the condition of the diner building changed those plans. I do know that once the building was not being used, an un-Godly smell began to eminate from it, I passed by there 3 days in a row and it was horrid.