04-04-2015, 04:31 AM
"as I understand, the facades, boardwalks, buildings, etc are proposed as worthy of historic preservation."
i would most definitely agree with the idea that the little old storefront strip and it's facades, boardwalks, buildings, etc is worthy of historic preservation. it exudes charming and unique old character and when it's gone, it's gone. the particulars of how and exactly what would be involved would need to be discussed and worked out.
"...as I understand, historic preservation would mean exclusion of anything that does not look or function like that which was preserved."
sounds to be referring to aesthetic requirements for any new construction within the boundaries of an established historic zone. here the devil really would be more in the details. it may be somewhat challenging at times to work through to a satisfactory balance between owner's discretion and some guidelines to determine limits of what will and what won't fit the historical character within the historic zone. something which could reasonably be worked out in my opinion ...similar to other zoning parameters.
-----
as for any structures "falling down of their own accord", that's a separate issue. if any structure is beyond saving, then sure, why not recycle? certainly can't see anything objectionable about that.
-----
i will emphatically say that any argument suggesting that historic preservation (in some exact form apparently as yet to be determined) should not occur because we should not be honoring the non-sustainable agricultural practices of that time-period does not hold any merit whatsoever.
i would most definitely agree with the idea that the little old storefront strip and it's facades, boardwalks, buildings, etc is worthy of historic preservation. it exudes charming and unique old character and when it's gone, it's gone. the particulars of how and exactly what would be involved would need to be discussed and worked out.
"...as I understand, historic preservation would mean exclusion of anything that does not look or function like that which was preserved."
sounds to be referring to aesthetic requirements for any new construction within the boundaries of an established historic zone. here the devil really would be more in the details. it may be somewhat challenging at times to work through to a satisfactory balance between owner's discretion and some guidelines to determine limits of what will and what won't fit the historical character within the historic zone. something which could reasonably be worked out in my opinion ...similar to other zoning parameters.
-----
as for any structures "falling down of their own accord", that's a separate issue. if any structure is beyond saving, then sure, why not recycle? certainly can't see anything objectionable about that.
-----
i will emphatically say that any argument suggesting that historic preservation (in some exact form apparently as yet to be determined) should not occur because we should not be honoring the non-sustainable agricultural practices of that time-period does not hold any merit whatsoever.