Maybe things are better now, but a few years ago when I was more involved with this issue, it was divisive in the Harrison Neighborhood. There was somewhat of a running battle between the 'preservationists' and the 'demolitionists'. I have a lot of respect for Jay Clark's opinions, and he was very articulate in explaining the argument from the demolitionist side. I can understand when a person or a person's friend or relative is assaulted or threatened - the perpetrator is wanted gone, in any manner and as soon as possible.
Keith Reitman also makes some good points on the preservationist side. I must agree that it does seem a shame to destroy a building because of people problems, whether they be bad renters or bad landlords,or both. Buildings should be demolished only for genuine 'building problems', and should be preserved if that can be done in a cost effective manner. I would surely think that a rehabbed home would usually bring in a higher quality neighbor and owner, just as would a new building. The victimized neighbors would have to feel confident that the boarded house will in fact be upgraded within a reasonable period of time. The boarded building must be kept secure and the grounds maintained in a presentable manner. When a building is demolished, housing is lost, and very probably affordable housing. A huge amount of demolition debris is sent off to the landfill, and possibly a vintage building with some neighborhood history is lost. ( Does anyone happen to know what became of my old home in Phillips: 1919 Columbus?) Dave Stack Harrison _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
