In a message dated 11/7/2002 9:01:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << This is one of the reasons why I believe the boundaries were chosen not for reasons of historic preservation but of social engineering of a particularly insidious kind.>>
I know that community conspiracy theories abound these days, and I too have wondered about the "real" reason that some things have happened - including Councilwoman Blackwell's Bill 020462. As for the suggestion that the proposed HD was intended as "social engineering," however, I can say quite definitely that no such thing was ever intended. Remember that the HD project was begun FIFTEEN YEARS AGO, in 1987! The only public grade schools serving Spruce Hill at the time were Wilson, Drew and (as a deseg alternative) Powel. As a member of the original committee, along with Alan Klein, Rose Amendolia, Rebecca Trumbull and David Brownlee (and maybe a couple of others who I can't remember now) I can tell you that we did not discuss or consider catchment areas. We discussed preserving buildings. We wanted to make sure that the area would not lose more porches and suffer from more iron railings used as replacements for columns and spindles. We wanted to avoid the loss of slate roofs and the unnecessary cost to unsuspecting homeowners, when unscrupulous roofers told homeowners that they had to replace an entire slate roof with asphalt rather than slipping in a few new slates to replace failed ones. We wanted to be sure landlords didn't enclose front porches to get an extra room to rent out. We wanted to be sure that houses which could be saved didn't get torn down. These are the types of concerns that led to the local historic district project in Spruce Hill. And while I agree with you, Al, that most people don't use wrought iron railings today, they STILL DO LOTS OF SORRY WORK, and plenty of it isn't even necessary: replacing porches with decks. Replacing spindles with 2x4's. Covering wood with vinyl siding. Painting bricks. Replacing windows with glass block. And enclosing porches. Furthermore, as the neighborhood's popularity increases now and local demand for rental units grows, a whole new set of preservation issues arises. Landlords could easily be tempted to rip down an older building and build anew, replacing our history with something modern and snazzy to appeal to undergraduate sensibilities. A neighborhood with such a large transient population as Spruce Hill has an ever-changing group of inhabitants and constant pressures to adapt to the latest whim. There are many reasons for historic preservation. The exact issues may not be the same as they were 15 years ago, but the need remains to preserve our historic heritage. And it has NOTHING to do with "social engineering." Melani Lamond ---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
