Posted Apr 3, 2014, 1:53 PM
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Robbinsdale, MN
Posts: 1,790
|
|
BillSimmons...I tend to agree with you, in that there are times where "preservation" is unnecessary. But, those preservationists definitely need/deserve to have a voice and a place at the table. Remember the Alhambra?
I have lived in a few cities now and I feel like I have seen some amazing examples of adaptive re-use! Milwaukee has a HUGE historic housing stock and also a HUGE selection of historic buildings in their downtown. There are very few 50s/60s urban renewal shitholes like in Sacramento. They have held tightly on to their history and it has proven to be a great thing. There is a whole neighborhood/district (the 3rd ward) that was, literally, ALL abandoned warehouses and factories when I first moved to Milwaukee in 2004. 10 years later, the neighborhood is thriving and teeming with condos, apartments, shops, restaurants, and lots and lots of people! Tearing down too much and getting rid of "the past" can leave any city bland and lacking culture. I know you're not advocating for something like this. But, pragmatic compromise can lead to major success for both sides and a thriving urban community that celebrates it's past and it's culture. I know Sacramento is not Milwaukee (thankfully). But, I also know that there are lessons to be learned from the preservationists and the new urbanists in both cities.
|