Historic Preservation

[hobbsyoyo]

What do you think about historic preservation of buildings and man-made structures?

The port of LA just gave a permit to SpaceX to move into a spot on the docks to build rockets. This is the second such lease - SpaceX walked away from another one for various reasons - and the terms of this lease are much more proactive in allowing SpaceX to change the buildings on the site. The first lease was prohibitive and would have required SpaceX to get approval for any changes beforehand. Now they can pretty much do as they please.

The thing is that the buildings that the original lease terms were protecting were old tuna and anchovy factories. They were not aesthetically pleasing or even notable, and they were in complete disuse in an unpopulated area. The only value they had was a reminder that once LA hosted more canneries than it does now.

So with that all in mind - what kinds of structures and buildings do you think warrant historic preservation? When is historic preservation warranted versus when does it get in the way of progress?

 

[Narz]

I'm a bigger fan of nature preservation.

Don't gaf about old buildings

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I feel like the two can go hand in hand. You can preserve the land adjacent to buildings and I think this is often done at both small scales (a building and its lawn) and large scales (big parks that are attached to some historic structure).

 

[Truthy]

Hilarious tags

I'll try to have an actual contribution later

 

[hobbsyoyo]

On the other hand, I think historic preservation can go to far. Like with the tuna canneries, who cares if that stays? Shoot I think there will be a much bigger historical artifact left by SpaceX on that spot when they eventually leave than the tuna canneries ever were.

Are you more likely to go to see a derelict tuna cannery or a derelict rocket factory? What if both were dressed up as museums after they closed? What if they were partially active sites? (as in some low-level of production still goes on there even if most is converted to a museum)

 

[AmazonQueen]

Don't underestimate the appeal of former industrial sites. I've been to a couple of coal mines that are now historical sites with museums attached and they were well worth a visit.
Still, not everything can be preserved. We only need so many preserved Victorian terraced streets or old tuna canneries.

 

[IglooDame]

The best kind of historical preservation is the in-use kind, where people are demonstrating how people lived/worked/etc back in the day, or tying it through to current times. But just because something is very old doesn't mean it warrants historic preservation. Buildings/structures that are considered old in the US (especially as you go further west), Europe/Asia/Africa considers fairly recent (especially as you get closer to the Middle East). "Oh, a cannery from the 1900s? Nice. Say, have you seen our fishing village dating back to before the birth of Christ?"

Mostly it comes down to, if there's a local Hysterical Society, more power to them. But let's try to keep a sense of perspective.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

We only need so many preserved Victorian terraced streets

The thread on reddit where I learned about this lease had a few European posters complaining about this.

 

[AmazonQueen]

The best kind of historical preservation is the in-use kind, where people are demonstrating how people lived/worked/etc back in the day, or tying it through to current times. But just because something is very old doesn't mean it warrants historic preservation. Buildings/structures that are considered old in the US (especially as you go further west), Europe/Asia/Africa considers fairly recent (especially as you get closer to the Middle East). "Oh, a cannery from the 1900s? Nice. Say, have you seen our fishing village dating back to before the birth of Christ?"

Mostly it comes down to, if there's a local Hysterical Society, more power to them. But let's try to keep a sense of perspective.

Yes, the Museum of Welsh Life, near where I live, is on this model and much more interesting than artefacts in cases in a more traditional museum.
The mining museums I've visited have former miners as guides who can offer some fascinating insights but that won't last for ever given the mines closed 30+ years ago.
When an industry has been an important part of a regions economy and has contributed to its culture I think its worth keeping 1 site of its type as a museum but not every coal mine or tuna cannery!

The thread on reddit where I learned about this lease had a few European posters complaining about this.

Its not so bad when its housing people still want to live in. Then it becomes a conservation area and the residents have to accept some limitations on changes they can make to their home (no pvc double-glazing or satellite dishes) but preserving slums wouldn't make much sense.

 

[amadeus]

Let the market sort it out.

If it comes across as crass or a simple solution... yes! But I don’t know what the historic value of a building is vs. a new building in most circumstances. I can offer my own view: old cannery? I guess if there’s something interesting about it and people want to go, but if it’s just sitting there dormant and nobody but a small special interest seems to care, then let the small special interest hold on to it and take care of it themselves.

It’s not just capitalistic economic value, it’s a real practical application of land use vs. time. I’d wager that less than 1% of the buildings in Manhattan stood there 200 years ago. Would they have been so valuable as cultural artifacts to save? Who is lamenting the loss of a dingy sweatshop on 43rd and 8th? (Pardon me, New Yorkers, but I don’t know if that’s a real street.)

I think for the most part the public sector has found the right touch in most American cities, but if virtually no one cares and the historic value to researchers and scholars is really marginal, bring in the bulldozers and let rip.

 

[elmurcis]

Anything that is older than few hundread yrs (medieval castle ruins/church and stuff). Or if its some rare thing for time. Outside of that - can have deal that have to preserve some piece of it but anything else - whatever constructors want.
Still keeping big trees would be *must have* as human still has no tools to grow 400 yrs old tree in few yrs

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Its not so bad when its housing people still want to live in. Then it becomes a conservation area and the residents have to accept some limitations on changes they can make to their home (no pvc double-glazing or satellite dishes) but preserving slums wouldn't make much sense.

One trip up I imagine is that the definition of what is a slum shifts over time. A building without running plumbing (or the ability to readily add it without major changes) may have been grand in the day but would be unlivable now. I know that's an extreme example (at least for the US) but over time buildings get new features that are hard or impossible to retrofit. Thus something nice can slip into less-desirable status.

And there are places with really nice buildings/homes that got wiped out economically and fell into disrepair or the city population shifted away from them. Gentrification and repopulation over time can restore them, so while they may be slums temporarily, that's not necessarily a permanent state.

 

[Mouthwash]

Certainly we don't have the right to destroy century-old monuments because we don't like the people who built them.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Cool yeah this isn't the thread for civil war monuments. Please argue about those specifically somewhere else.

Edit:
Also settlements in Israel/Gaza/Golan/Palestine.

 

[Bugfatty300]

I say Space X shouldn't be allowed to touch a grain of dust on a historical space site until they qualify as a significant contributor to space exploration rather than a novelty spy/facebook satellite taxi service.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Let the market sort it out.

If it comes across as crass or a simple solution... yes! But I don’t know what the historic value of a building is vs. a new building in most circumstances. I can offer my own view: old cannery? I guess if there’s something interesting about it and people want to go, but if it’s just sitting there dormant and nobody but a small special interest seems to care, then let the small special interest hold on to it and take care of it themselves.

It’s not just capitalistic economic value, it’s a real practical application of land use vs. time. I’d wager that less than 1% of the buildings in Manhattan stood there 200 years ago. Would they have been so valuable as cultural artifacts to save? Who is lamenting the loss of a dingy sweatshop on 43rd and 8th? (Pardon me, New Yorkers, but I don’t know if that’s a real street.)

I think for the most part the public sector has found the right touch in most American cities, but if virtually no one cares and the historic value to researchers and scholars is really marginal, bring in the bulldozers and let rip.

I like the preservation of old building as a general rule. sometimes it may be only the veneer, sometimes the whole thing or something in between. I think each community should decide and not just leave it to the market. Look at Savannah GA, Charleston SC, Williamsburg VA, Federal Hill in Baltimore. IIRC, central Paris (@Marla_Singer ) is protected. Pingyao in China is a wonderful to visit, small walled city with all the buildings inside the wall preserved. Venice we are probably going to lose. Buildings and neighborhoods that are preserved become cultural touchstones for future generations (+1 to tourism) and distinctive features and attractions for the future.

LA canneries? Tear them down.
Chrysler building in NYC? Preserve.

In 1970 Albuquerque torn down the Alvarado Hotel & Train Station, a Harvey House from 1902. Crying shame.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Wild shot in the dark here, but despite the real setting being Monterey those old canneries may have been used as location for the filming of Cannery Row. In LA nothing gets marked as a historical site faster than something that shows up in a movie.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Bulldoze the whole works and start over. History bores me and I couldn't care less about a bunch of old dilapidated buildings. If they were in good shape or had been honestly preserved for their cultural value, then maybe, sure. But a bunch of rundown old buildings? Meh.

 

[AdamCrock]

Some Warsaw buildings are left just like the Nazis left them....... to remember .......