Wrecking Ball Watch: The Thomas B. Watkins House, 1008 S. Broadway, Lexington, Kentucky

The last home designed by Lexington architect John McMurtry  – a man who shaped much of the high-style architecture of 19th century Kentucky – has received its death notice.  A demolition application has been filed for the Thomas B. Watkins House, located at 1008 South Broadway, at the southwest corner of S. Broadway and Virginia Avenue. The brick house, constructed in 1887, is listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and was designed by McMurtry for his daughter Anne and her family.

The façade of the Watkins House.

For 10 years, I worked in a former tobacco warehouse within view of the Watkins House, and wrote about the dwelling in 2017. At that time the house, long used as offices, was vacant. Two years later, the elegant porches on the house were boarded up with plywood, presumably to prevent the homeless residents of Lexington from sleeping under their shelter.

One of the side porches boarded up in the fall of 2019.

According to architectural historian Water Langsam, the author of the NRHP nomination for the property, the house “summarizes many of the themes of McMurtry’s career, as well as having a very personal quality, and reflects the changes that had occurred in his houses since the antebellum period.”

John McMurtry’s plans for the Watkins House.

John McMurtry was the subject of noted architectural historian Clay Lancaster’s masters thesis at the University of Kentucky. Lancaster wrote of the late 19th century work of McCmurtry as “formal symmetry having been replaced by an easy irregularity of plan, monumentality having given way to intimacy—yet without remarkable reduction in overall size.” McMurtry, credited with popularizing the Gothic Revival style in Kentucky, worked his magic in this final family home, crafted for his family.

Fall 2019 façade.

McMurtry died in 1890. The list of his designs across Kentucky include the Clark County Courthouse, Floral Hall at the Red Mile Racetrack, the Thomas January House on West Second Street in Lexington, Loudoun House in Lexington, and the gatehouse at the Paris Cemetery in Paris, Kentucky – among many other notable buildings.

It’s no secret I loathe demolition of historic buildings that can be reused and could, with a little thought and imagination, continue to be useful, rathe than fodder for the landfill – my ire is even stronger for the wanton destruction of this building. South Broadway has been razed and rebuilt since the mid-20th century, and very little has been saved.

Location of the Thomas B. Watkins House (blue arrow) in Lexington, Kentucky.

Plywood and the Watkins House have melt before. In 1982, as the NRHP nomination was being written, the house stood shuttered and empty. But then, the dwelling was about to undergo restoration for use as an office.

Where is the foresight to once again save this remarkable building, a house designed specifically by a loving father for his daughter, and one of the last vestiges of the estates that once lined Broadway and Harrodsburg Road?

Watkins House, circa 1982. Photograph from the NRHP files.

The Thomas B. Watkins House once stood on a 40-acre parcel. That seems almost unthinkable now, but the solid masonry structure persevered throughout the tumult of development, road widening, and the expansion of Lexington. There is no need to consign it to the list of those lost treasures that preceded it. But as always, I imagine the lure of profit is stronger than the desire to keep the building standing for another 100 years.

 

Comments

  1. Susan says:

    What a travesty!!!! I hope you dont mind, I shared your article to my FB page.
    Is there any chance that if enough people protest this could be changed?

  2. Robert Mcwilliams says:

    So very sad. Lexington can and should do better.

  3. Don Augenstein says:

    So very very sad. Lexington Your better than this ! Please don’t let this happpen

  4. Karen Barnes says:

    Sad but understandable. Large, old homes require continuous maintenance. Very few have the $$$$ to invest.
    Veey unlikely but hopefully the interior wood can / will be salvaged and used elsewhere.

  5. Tom Richardson says:

    I remember well when this house was brought back from oblivion in the early 1980s and it was kind of a new thing back then to renovate and restore old buildings. Unlike so many that are destined for the wrecking ball this building is in remarkably good condition. It has been extremely well-maintained up until the last several years the roof appears to be in great shape they have always maintained the box gutters and I am almost certain that the 1982 restoration involved Tuckpointing all the masonry. If ever there was a building well worth the effort to relocate it this is the one. I wonder if the bluegrass trust would put the effort into this that they put into that old defunct mid 50s bank building that subsequently was torn down anyway.

  6. Peter Bourne says:

    I really wish this building could be saved, but predatory capitalism will not allow it. As an office space, it is too small for a good sized office company and to costly for a small concern. It is also too costly to relocate elsewhere.

    Since the high density residential use has been approved for the adjacent former warehouse space, it stands to reason that they desire this corner property to make it a more viable product.

  7. Tarla Dearinger says:

    So sad to hear this! I too remember when it was rehabbed before and was hoping it would see new life again. Lexington should do better with these old historical homes that are so special and such a long standing part of our cities history. It makes our hometown what it is .

  8. Sally Putnam says:

    How can a house on the National Register for Historic Places be demolished? This is such a shame!!

    1. Janie-Rice Brother says:

      Sadly, being listed in the National Register does not place any restrictions on private property owners.

      1. Jim Jackson says:

        Just hate it that we are losing these great old Kentucky homes and buildings. They are so representative of the history of our state.
        We all need to be supportive of keeping and preserving and helping everyone appreciate them.

    2. Patti Nickell says:

      Sally,

      I was wondering the same thing. And I also agree with the poster who said Lexington is better than this, although sadly, it appears it isn’t. This is really sad.

  9. Patrick says:

    This would be a sad waste.

    I truly hope something better comes of this than destruction of s perfectly good historic building.

  10. Phillip says:

    Sad to hear this! In this day and time, history is still being destroyed? Who’s in charge here? Sad…..very sad!

  11. Lynn says:

    This makes me very sad. My grandmother lived in South Broadway Park, the next street over from Virginia Avenue, I always thought this house was beautiful. So many of the beautiful homes of that time are either gone or been allowed to deteriorate. It is a sad statement of our modern “throw away” society.

  12. C martin says:

    Lexington puts all kinds of money into “affordable” housing that has zero street appeal or durability. Why not put some of those same funds into restoring some of our unique historic structures so people might live in those places they could find worthy of appreciation and pride. Once they’re gone, what replaces them is usually uninteresting cheap construction that hard nothing to our community.

  13. martie says:

    Why is it that in Europe there are homes and buildings dating back a millennium, but here in the good ol’ US of A, folks have this need to tear things down and rebuild “better”.

    1. Liz Harper says:

      They will not build something “better”. It will be another tacky dorm- like apartment building for U.K. students like the ones on Angliana Ave. and South Broadway closer to town. YUK. So much for history and beauty in Lexington.

  14. Delmer Cox says:

    So very sad
    Another example of people not caring for the past and destroying anything for a buck or another convenient store
    Sad very sad

  15. Margaret says:

    I wrote Janie-Rice privately on this topic a year ago but might as well go public now. It costs a fortune…a FORTUNE, to make an old building suitable for today’s life. I inherited my family farm 24 years ago with an 1834 frame two story house upon it. A restoration company took it back to the studs and made it up to date for me…we forced it to work like a 20th century house. It can be done but only if you are willing to spend two years and over seven figures. It has 3 HVAC systems, a 300 amp service, hard wired alarm system and so on. Every clapboard was removed and run thru a planer to remove the old chunky paint. Every old window removed and restored. Interior storms custom made. But…our real world is four hours away, we only went one weekend a month. We realized we never wanted to retire there. Then our contractor died. Nobody no longer 10 minutes away to check on it. We gave up and sold the farm in an auction in December. Being on a main road and also excellent farmland, it sold for twice what we expected. You ideally need the bug people there three times a year. You also need to keep it always between 55 and 85 inside the house year round. The cellar has an exhaust fan hooked to a humidistat to keep mold from forming. Making an old loosely built house airtight was not a good idea. We had to upgrade to an architect grade roof due to high winds out in the country. An old house converted to work in today’s world is a very very expensive proposition. I still am glad I did it but I am glad I sold it well too, since I no longer had a restoration man to work on it. I spent more than a third of my life with it and loved it but it is only for those who are willing to pour money into it and also have restoration help and materials available.

    1. Lexington Streetsweper says:

      Very well said. These old buildings were never intended to be up graded to today’s standards. They were meant to be maintained in a constant and timely manner, very much like the buildings we construct today. The fault of the demise of this home did not come in the last few years, it began decades ago.

    2. Susan Dworkin says:

      I understand and agree with everything you said. Makes sense, but….
      If you apply this argument to let’s say an old person we would be euthanizing them.
      Some things have a worth beyond money and are worth saving, including me, I hope, even though I am getting old and nothing works like it used to and it takes money to keep it going. I know this analogy is a stretch but when some things are gone they can never be replaced and we all lose. I am sure that whatever goes on that lot in the future will be a sad and incomparable substitute for what is there now. Lexington will look just like everywhere else.

      1. Margaret says:

        I see what you are saying but money is just part of it. You need a restoration trained crew and vintage stock. We were getting floorboards out of old cotton warehouses in the Deep South. We gave up on a new standing seam roof…nobody within 100 miles knew how to install one. Drywallers in the beginning said they could do five houses in the amount of time it took to do ours because everything was out of square. It is a bitter pill to take when you realize nobody wants to work on your precious old home….it hurts. Most workers prefer a quick fix. The kicker is a bike path s due to be run past the front of the farm soon and we will lose a great portion of the front yard, in addition to a passing lane for the road. Yes we will be paid for what they are taking but the noise from the traffic…already you cannot talk in the front yard without shouting….you cannot fight the government taking your land. It was time to go.

    3. Linda M. says:

      I admire this house every time I stop at the light there. It beautiful and I would love nothing more than to be able to live there. It is a shame, to say the least, to see old houses like this be demolished to make way for another structure. I guess this is sort of like evolution in a sense.

  16. Sarah Delabar says:

    I hate what greed has done to my home town. Sad sad sad

  17. Brenda S Braden says:

    So sad when these beautiful homes are destroyed

  18. Jerry Skees says:

    While I was a professor at UK, we had offices in the upstairs of this building. We were there from 2001 to 2016. We had many guest from all over the world visit and it was always a pleasure to give them the history of this wonderful historic site. We used the front room downstairs to host many meetings about how to support financial markets for the poor and vulnerable in the world to protect them from natural disasters. It was difficult to move out when the building was sold. The tall ceilings, intricate staircase, and crown molding were special.

    1. Janie-Rice Brother says:

      Thank you so much for sharing your experience of the space!

    2. Linda M. says:

      I would love to tour this house and learn of it’s history.

  19. miki says:

    Can we stop this? I thought buildings on the Historical register couldn’t be touched? I’m ready. Let’s chain ourselves to it! 😁

  20. Sara says:

    Is there a chance someone can move the building to another location?
    My family and I might be interested in taking on the project, as long as the interiors have not been too modernized. If the beautiful craftsmanship on the interior has been gutted and renovated, then it is only a shell of a historic building.

    1. Janie-Rice Brother says:

      Any structure can be moved, of course, but with a solid masonry building in this location (lots of development, lots of overhead power lines) – I’m not sure where it could go. There’s not likely a suitable parcel within two miles. If it was out in the country, it would be easier. The historic interior is still intact.

  21. Margaret Wilson says:

    Why not have a slew of artists pitch in together and buy the place? We could use it a a community studio/gallery. I would be willing to pitch in money. We could be joint owners or have a collaborative. If I knew HOW to organize such a thing, I would.

    1. Janie-Rice Brother says:

      I think that would be an incredible idea! But I imagine the owners (developers)are looking to all of the money they can reap from building some high-density something on the parcel, rather than contributing to the community by allowing the house to be preserved and further the arts.

  22. Yes it is sad. When I first moved to Lexington in 1953 to a house on south limestone, it has been gone for years and years. A 2 story brick. On each corner across from it were 3 frat houses. One still stands. All the other buildings razed, parking lot, paved over lot and hard put to tell where things are! It happens all over Lexington. East main street tore out homes to build townhouses down from Ashland Avenue years and years ago. Some places unrecognizable. I have always said@, and its true, lex is the only town that likes to tear down things and build back up something, just a reminder! All of the 1st block of main street torn out, and look whats there today. Lexington set your priorities for historical worth!

  23. Donna Johnson says:

    All my life I dreamed of having a large beautiful home. To think they will just take a wreaking ball and demolish this house is heartbreaking! To some of us, this home would be a blessing, the answer to many prayers and the a dream come true.

  24. Bob Russell-Tutty says:

    As usual Lexington city leaders fail there responsibility to preserve and protect
    Lexington’s Past. Idiots!

Comments are closed.