Cunninghams_right t1_jdxx9hp wrote
at this point, the damage is done. that building is already toast. what we need is some ordinances to prevent demolition by neglect.
​
frolicndetour t1_jdy4o3i wrote
I agree. The building was beautiful but it's falling apart and dangerous and no one will invest the money to try to make it usable. The time for saving it was before that numbnuts bought the building and demolished part of it without following through on the project, and then left it to rot for a decade.
bmore t1_je4h5uf wrote
The point of the article is the process. By skipping the required Part II hearing and streamlining this demolition, they've likely set precedent that can be used in the future to speedily demolish other historic properties without pause, creating more situations like this one.
DoIt2It t1_je6urj4 wrote
Yeah, this building is collapsing. And besides being old, I still haven’t figured out what, exactly, is “historic” and in need of preservation
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments