KAREN ALLEN wrote:
While the University City Historical Society has not yet taken a
position on the proposed 11 story hotel, it should be instructive to
review its position in another situation that impacted historic
preservation. I offer to you an article printed in the January, 2007
UCHS newsletter. The article does not identify its author, but the
newsletter itself was edited by Mike Hardy, a longtime Board member
and a former officer of UCHS. Mike Hardy testified at the Historical
Commission hearing this past Friday as a private individual, in
support of the 11-story hotel
Please take note of the extreme language used to describe the
enclosing of a porch. Please also note the opinions offered on how
that one alteration would impact the overall area. If that type of
language and imagery has been used by UCHS in its newsletter to
describe the alteration of one building, what can we expect them to
say about the hotel project's impact on entire streetscapes?
I love how the anonymous (and clearly deranged) author called this a
"rape." But the UCHS was always pretty crazy about the Historic District
proposal: I recall their assembling and displaying portfolios of houses
with design abominations. Maybe they wanted to illustrate something bad,
but they wound up looking as though they were drawing up lists of
suspects for when they got in power and _habeus corpus_ was suspended.
By the way... has anyone looked into Lussenhop's investors? I have no
information on the matter, but it'd be interesting if we could match
locals' rhetoric to their pocketbooks.
----
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>.
