Quote:
Originally Posted by belmont bob
...
So I’m not sure if the very old buildings of Bunker Hill could have weathered long enough to where their value as a structure was as important as the value of the bare land. Having seen some of those places first-hand as a teenager, I’m not convinced that in their dilapidated state they could have survived. Perhaps if the hill had remained a viable residential area the buildings would have not deteriorated so fast.
|
Great series of Bunker Hill shots,
FredH--perhaps one of the most important gathering of photos ever on NLA. Thanks for posting, and don't stop until you can't find any more.
As for lamentations over the loss of Bunker Hill-- as has been pointed out on the thread before, the silver lining in the demolition may be what escaped the wrecking ball: the 1900s/10s/20s business district to its east. L.A. had long wanted to get rid of Bunker Hill because of the barrier it presented to westward expansion--the neglected wooden houses were easy to tear down, if the hill itself presented more of a problem. While I like many others fantasize about some sort of Victorian residential paradise in a preserved BH, we might then have lost what today is roaring back as an urbanist's dream--loft living. Sometimes though I wonder how long it will be before the pendulum swings back and the younger professionals in the district get older and wonder where the outdoors went.