Someone just sent me this link: http://www.sacredplaces.org
Partners for Sacred Places is the only national, non-sectarian, non-profit organization dedicated to the sound stewardship and active community use of America's older religious properties. Partners provides assistance to the people who care for sacred places while promoting a new understanding of how these places sustain communities. In a message dated 8/4/2004 3:46:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Shaera writes: >BGAndersEn wrote: > >"I think its a shame that the tower collpased last night. I'm going to �guess >the heavy rains and a lack of proper maintenance were the cause. � > >How many other historic buildings are going to fall before we really �invest >in historic preservation?" > > >I heard on the news that this building wasn't really being used as a church � >anymore, but as a shelter. �In that regard it is amazing and wonderful that � >no one was seriously injured or worse. > >I'm going to go with the guess that the heavy rains we've been having did � >weaken the structure and the one yesterday was just the last straw. > >Historic preservation would be a good thing, and something that's done �in >places here in the US and it seems especially in parts of Europe and �Great >Britain where they really DO have history. �Of course, the taxes in �England, at >least, are far higher than ours here. �That's what helps pay �for the >preservation. �And there is a difference even there as to what is � >preserved/rebuilt/restored...my roommate, who's been to London several times, �told >me about >seeing the bombed out buildings from WWII being left as is, with �new buildings all >around them. �They didn't tear them all down, but they �didn't rebuild some >of them either. �Maybe their perspective on what �falls under historic >preservation (the Roman wall vs. a building from the 20th �centrury) is different. > >I'm all for preservation, when it is feasible - like the Victory �Building. � >I recall spending way too many nights there when the London �Victory Club was >open and it was a beautiful building. �I was so sad to see �it just sitting >there rotting away for years. �I'm not sure I like all the �"luxury" high priced >living I'm seeing all over the place, but that's another �story. > >To me, there is a difference between preservation and designation. � The >first does try, with (I believe?) the help of federal/state funding along �with >private investors, to restore/rehab/repair. �Designation, on the other �hand, >forces an individual to fork over money they may not have to � >restore/rehab/repair in a way that a small group of people decide is right with �no >help/funding >from the government - state or federal. > >Wendy > > > ---- 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>.
