Demolition can sometimes be the best option

This weekend was a celebration of preservation and restoration, with Heritage Days highlighted by the dedication of the Keystone Business Center.

Thanks to an outstanding local effort and no small infusion of cash, the imposing Keystone now has a chance to return to rightful position in downtown McCook.

But some old buildings are worthy of preservation, and others are not. The City Council has decided that the old West Ward building is among the latter.

The city hopes that demolition of the building can begin soon, although an assessment of the building's historical value must now be completed at additional cost. If voters don't approve construction of a new public safety center, financed by sales* taxes, at the November election, there won't be much rush to complete the razing.

But a look around town, however, reveals the truth that, sometimes, a vacant lot is more attractive than a rundown building.

For example, the newly cleared corner of Highway 83 and South Street, the former location of the "big yellow house" in east McCook, and the soon-t0-be filled basement which once supported the Romanoff building at Norris and B are good examples of areas that are receiving a fresh start. Other houses have been torn down to make attractive building sites, and old brick buildings have come down to make room for much-needed parking.

And there should be more. The old hospital in west McCook, lately a building of low-cost apartments, is sitting empty after being closed because of simple economics. How long it can sit empty before turning into an eyesore is anybody's guess.

We would prefer it be remodeled and returned into much-needed housing, but whether someone could make that pay off is also anybody's guess.

Remodeling, repairing and refurbishing are attractive to anyone with conservative Midwest values.

But sometimes it's best to tear an old building down, wiping the slate clean and leaving space open for new development is the most attractive option.

*There was an error in the print version of this editorial, which has been corrected online. If approved by the voters, the public safety center will be funded by a bond, which will be backed by SALES tax proceeds. The passage of the bond will not affect property taxes. The error will be corrected in print Thursday.