Doc Crow's

I've heard no mention of a parking lot and it doesn't sound like anything will be done with these buildings for a long time. I can see this situation being tied up in the court system for years.

They are not talking about tearing down the buildings to run an interstate through downtown. They are going to use the space to revitalize and grow the area. Everyone is admitting the buildings are in horrible shape, but uses the historical argument to keep them from being torn down. I just don't see the history and would rather see the space put to use then continue to be an eyesore and waste

http://fatlip.leoweekly.com/2011/02/09/whiskey-row-could-become-parking-lot/

There's the problem that we are letting him raze the buildings. And then there's going to be the much bigger problem (if people care to make it a problem) if he razes the buildings and then does nothing with the space. Happened in Lexington. Seems to be happening with Museum Plaza.

I've heard no mention of a parking lot and it doesn't sound like anything will be done with these buildings for a long time. I can see this situation being tied up in the court system for years.

They are not talking about tearing down the buildings to run an interstate through downtown. They are going to use the space to revitalize and grow the area. Everyone is admitting the buildings are in horrible shape, but uses the historical argument to keep them from being torn down. I just don't see the history and would rather see the space put to use then continue to be an eyesore and waste

http://fatlip.leoweekly.com/2011/02/09/whiskey-row-could-become-parking-lot/

There's the problem that we are letting him raze the buildings. And then there's going to be the much bigger problem (if people care to make it a problem) if he razes the buildings and then does nothing with the space. Happened in Lexington. Seems to be happening with Museum Plaza.

5 years is crazy. What the hell are these people thinking?

I've heard no mention of a parking lot and it doesn't sound like anything will be done with these buildings for a long time. I can see this situation being tied up in the court system for years.

They are not talking about tearing down the buildings to run an interstate through downtown. They are going to use the space to revitalize and grow the area. Everyone is admitting the buildings are in horrible shape, but uses the historical argument to keep them from being torn down. I just don't see the history and would rather see the space put to use then continue to be an eyesore and waste

http://fatlip.leoweekly.com/2011/02/09/whiskey-row-could-become-parking-lot/

There's the problem that we are letting him raze the buildings. And then there's going to be the much bigger problem (if people care to make it a problem) if he razes the buildings and then does nothing with the space. Happened in Lexington. Seems to be happening with Museum Plaza.

Wow...Is parking needed downtown? I can understand that he would need to make money on that property but will it be more profitable then building a structure?

Sooooo, any more reviews of Doc Crow's?

I went last night with my mom and brother. Really liked the space, especially the city-block long shotgun/alley-like design. We sat all the way in the back in one of two square dining areas.

We didn't have any alcoholic drinks, so I'll report just on the food. I had the pulled pork tacos and the fried green tomatoes. My brother had the half-slab of St. Louis ribs and onion rings. My mom had the fried catfish and sweet potato fries. I didn't have a bite of any of their food, but all of it received rave reviews. My brother, who has a penchant to be goofy, said at one point in the dinner, "I think I'm in love with these ribs."

I found my food to be lacking both in flavor and temperature. The tacos were room temperature and the meat, as a result, was a little on the tough side. The tacos also needed some form of wetness added to them. The second one was better once I added BBQ sauce. The fried green tomatoes were also lukewarm. I liked the meal which covered the tomatoes, but found the tomatoes to be both too firm and too thinly sliced. They probably would be a better choice in season.

Doc Crow's has promise. It fills a hole in the city's dining landscape and should do well especially with the national conventions that come to town. I can't help but think that places like Tumbleweed and Texas Roadhouse are keen to see a higher scale competitor in town. I'd expect things to improve with time, so I'm not writing this place off. Truth be told, it's not really in my dining wheelhouse. I'm a fairly healthy eater, so "country" sides, BBQ, and fried items don't do much for me - however good they might be. I will want to do the raw bar at some point. I ran into an old friend who was working behind the bar as I was leaving, so I could see myself coming back to drink and eat at the bar.

One final note. I think it's impossible to be able to walk out of this place at night, look east down Main and not consider what will be lost when Whiskey Row is destroyed. There's Bearno's, Doc Crow's, and O'Sheas. Imagine a full block of neon signs welcoming people into who knows the variety of bars and restaurants. So there's that too. Once the demolition ball starts, I'm not sure I'm going to be in the mood to go to Doc Crow's. And that's no fault of theirs. Just how it is for me.

[Robin Garr]

One final note. I think it's impossible to be able to walk out of this place at night, look east down Main and not consider what will be lost when Whiskey Row is destroyed. There's Bearno's, Doc Crow's, and O'Sheas. Imagine a full block of neon signs welcoming people into who knows the variety of bars and restaurants.

Well said. Such a block would really do what Fourth Street Live wishes it could. It would be a major entertainment attraction, with reality and soul. And that's what we'll lose if we let them tear down the Blue Strip. Saving it might be costly, but it's priceless.

One final note. I think it's impossible to be able to walk out of this place at night, look east down Main and not consider what will be lost when Whiskey Row is destroyed. There's Bearno's, Doc Crow's, and O'Sheas. Imagine a full block of neon signs welcoming people into who knows the variety of bars and restaurants.

Well said. Such a block would really do what Fourth Street Live wishes it could. It would be a major entertainment attraction, with reality and soul. And that's what we'll lose if we let them tear down the Blue Strip. Saving it might be costly, but it's priceless.

We have reaped what we sowed. Out of sheer laziness, conformity, and lack of vision, we allowed an outsider to come in and tell us what Louisville needed. They gave us the "if you only do this, you'll gain this, and this, and this." We listened, and we got hosed. All along, there was this gem of a city block that was everything Louisville wanted. Maybe not only should we lose Whiskey Row, but maybe we should have to do endless penance going by Crap Street Live on a regular basis. Who knows how long Crap Street Live will stand, but let's all agree there will never be a fight over it's historical significance - unless the argument is one regarding not repeating the mistakes of a prior generation.

Saving it might be costly, but it's priceless.

I hope no one has misconstrued my previous statements regarding this subject. I am not an advocate of tearing down the old to replace it with the new (change for the sake of change). That said I'm also a realist and hold the opinion that many of the people chanting for the "at any cost" restoration of these buildings are not in touch with the structural and economic realities of this situation.

Structually, the problems with these buildings go way beyond rotting windows, crumbling facades and other cosmetic issues observable from street level. The very foundations and other structural components have deteriorated to the point where nothing outside of a full archeological level restoration could save them. My bride, the lovely Rebecca, has been in the construction industry for 20 years...many of them working for a contractor/developer who has restored historical buildings. This developers most recent restoration was of a historic hotel that was in no where near the state of disrepair that these building are in. The final cost of the restoration was 4 times the cost of new (but historically based) construction.

OK, so lets ignore the structural reality and look at the economic reality. Developers I am familiar with are in the business to make money...as (I assume) are the businesses that would occupy said structures. My limited grasp of economics tells me that if it costs the developer 5X the cost of new construction to restore a building that these costs will be passed along to the tenants in the form of rent. Under the best of economic conditions this virtually guarantees a revolving door of tenants, each of them arriving with a fistful of rosey cheeked projections...but ultimately succumbing to the black realities of unsustainability.

Saving it might be costly, but it's priceless.

I hope no one has misconstrued my previous statements regarding this subject. I am not an advocate of tearing down the old to replace it with the new (change for the sake of change). That said I'm also a realist and hold the opinion that many of the people chanting for the "at any cost" restoration of these buildings are not in touch with the structural and economic realities of this situation.

Structually, the problems with these buildings go way beyond rotting windows, crumbling facades and other cosmetic issues observable from street level. The very foundations and other structural components have deteriorated to the point where nothing outside of a full archeological level restoration could save them. My bride, the lovely Rebecca, has been in the construction industry for 20 years...many of them working for a contractor/developer who has restored historical buildings. This developers most recent restoration was of a historic hotel that was in no where near the state of disrepair that these building are in. The final cost of the restoration was 4 times the cost of new (but historically based) construction.

OK, so lets ignore the structural reality and look at the economic reality. Developers I am familiar with are in the business to make money...as (I assume) are the businesses that would occupy said structures. My limited grasp of economics tells me that if it costs the developer 5X the cost of new construction to restore a building that these costs will be passed along to the tenants in the form of rent. Under the best of economic conditions this virtually guarantees a revolving door of tenants, each of them arriving with a fistful of rosey cheeked projections...but ultimately succumbing to the black realities of unsustainability.

Steve, I think your take on the issue is best described as well reasoned. We've arrived at the point where there are basically two side to the issues. The fanatics who want it saved and the well reasoned people who want it saved within reasonable conditions.

It's sad that there was a point in our city's past where we probably could have done something before it was too late. It's not that I am against the "what will it cost" argument. Like I said, that's a reasonable argument. But only within a narrow context. If we, as a city, had taken the Cordish tax breaks and used it on something that really matters to us as a city, we wouldn't be in this situation. I don't know the particulars of the situation, but I'm sure there was a moment in the city's near past where they could have done something. Good work, Jerry.

As you've mentioned your wife a few times now, I just wanted to say I have brother who specializes in historical preservation and materials. He works for one of the premiere firms in what has come to be known as the field of "forensics architecture." He spends his days doing this (http://www.wje.com/services/facade_assessment.php I think he goes to bed at night dreaming of saving Whiskey Row.