Here's an irony: a suburban weekly and a big city voice are both talking about historic preservation on the same day over preservation concerns...and thanks to a decision from a judge, historic preservation is now worth less than spit in PA...And seriously, does anyone think Ed Rendell gives a darn about this? Bravo to both papers for these editorials
Posted on Thu, Jan. 24, 2008
Editorial: Historic Demolition
Rendell to the rescue?
The Convention Center wrecking ball is poised to topple two historic buildings on North Broad Street, and bury the state's historic preservation agency in the rubble.
It appears that only a reprieve from Gov. Rendell will save the buildings, now that a Commonwealth Court judge has ruled in favor of demolition plans by the state-run Pennsylvania Convention Center Authority.....Hard to believe the former mayor of the city would turn a blind eye to preserving a piece of Philadelphia's history. Not a great detail for Rendell's legacy resume. But an even more important principle is at stake: Can the state Historical and Museum Commission still enforce future preservation agreements?
In this case, the historical commission had what should have been regarded as an ironclad agreement with the Convention Center. The deal called for incorporating two historic facades into the center's expansion.
Center officials now want to renege, claiming higher preservation costs. A deal is a deal. Yet Judge Keith B. Quigley ruled that the Department of General Services, which is overseeing the convention expansion, merely had to consult the commission; not keep its word.
Beyond the outrageous and irresponsible decision to break the agreement, state officials and the court risk rendering the commission toothless in future preservation efforts
And...
Posted on Thu, Jan 24, 2008
Editorial
Fight for the fabric
This is not just about one or two houses.
The properties on Bloomingdale Avenue are a test case — there always has to be one — on how tenacious a municipality and its residents are about preserving their history and the fabric of their neighborhoods.
The Radnor Township Board of Commissioners is generally charged with the responsibilities of foresight, of considering the future of the area and the good of the majority. They do indeed embrace this task, and the proposed demolition and development should be profoundly considered in those standards.
We live in a world where we audaciously throw things away because they are apparently replaceable.
Well, these buildings aren’t replaceable. And any developer who says they aren’t rehabable simply does not want to do the job. (As for any claimed economic hardship, we can’t imagine that one cannot get a reasonable rate of return on any building within downtown Wayne.)
By creating a local historic district, the township pledged its commitment to the future of its history.
And if the HARB indeed wants to be an effective resource, it should provide guidance on appropriate design and architectural detail...But, one might ask, if a building in an historic district cannot be protected from demolition, how can an old schoolhouse or farmhouse anywhere else in Radnor stand a chance?
No doubt, as with many decisions the board makes, the subtle threat of a lawsuit is always present. This case is no exception. But the commissioners, elected by the public to their positions, are responsible to decide which battles are worth fighting....This decision should be made despite the possibility of a lawsuit. Let’s stand behind the historic ordinance: if we lose, we lose.
After all, if we don’t fight for the long-term, irreplaceable fabric of our town, we’ve already lost.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati