Quote:
Originally Posted by McBane
I know what you meant and I agree, particularly this statement that I quoted. Basically, no matter how historically or architecturally significant a parking garage may be (and really, how historical or attractive can a parking garage be?), it should never, ever, ever be protected from being redeveloped into a better use. Ever, ever, ever (in my Chris Tucker voice).
Sorry, but a parking garage, even a well designed one with ground floor retail, is one of the lowest forms of land use in an urban area and any opportunity to replace one with a more dynamic use should be welcomed by all.
|
I also agree with Parkway's point, but I don't see how you take that statement and then jump to the idea that no parking garage should ever be preserved. This building fits in well within basically any urban enviroment. It has street facing retail on all sides and it is a very striking building. It is indistinguishable as parking garage. It succeeds as a building regardless of use, and the use no matter how humble is still useful. I am no defender of the car or the right to parking spaces, but the simple reality is they are in demand in this city. Demolishing this garage, only discourages the demolition of other nearby garages that are all inferior by making their parking spaces more valuable.
I remember in the early 2000s, riding the bus down chestnut freequently, and this building always caught my eye, I never would have guessed it was a garage.
All of that said. I don't think it is worthy of historic preservation. As unique and interesting as this building is, it's not important enough to say it should remain forever, especially considering it is not in great repair. But it's unique, it's interesting, it's useful, it's (ironically) pedestrian friendly. If it's going to be torn down, it should be torn down for something, it shouldn't just be torn down so they can keep their options open and prevent historic preservation down the line. The future is a fickle place, and as great as the Market East development looks, there's no telling what will happen in the future. If they tear this down and plan to build something in 5 years, everyone on this board should be well aware at this point that major projects planned numerous years down the line, have a a low probability of ever being built.
So I'm fine with knocking it down, but it should be to build something as soon as they finished knocking it down. I'm no fan of looking at an empty lot instead of a handsome building, while they wait for the right market conditions to build the next phase.