Progress? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

ngdawg · 09-23-2006, 09:39 PM

Are we losing our history?
Route 15

I've always been intrigued by old buildings, houses, etc. I even bought an old house because I can't stand new ones. Lately, I've turned that life-long love of
the old into a semi-hobby-going to sites about to be demolished and (probably trespassing), taking a lot of photographs.
This story, along with another, Wildwoods are frightening to me. Once something is gone, it's gone. I realize there has to be 'progress', but it seems to come at a total disregard for heritage, history, culture. While some towns, like Cape May, NJ, embrace their heritage and make strides to revive it, others, like Wildwood, seem to want to dump it.
I grew up in a small town next to the Delaware River. We were known as hicks, but the town has a wealth of history. Thomas Payne lived there, Joseph Bonaparte (Napoleon's brother) had an estate there. It was home to one of the oldest military schools in the country and is home to the first school founded by Clara Barton. But the historic homes back when I was growing up there had become rentals, divided into apartments, cheaply sided and run down. In the past 15 years though, it's become a quaint and rather expensive village with these homes beautifully restored back to single family dwellings.
What price should we pay for progress? Should laws be in place that would help more to preserve the fading architecture of old? Personally, I feel there should be much more incentive to revive old buildings to new use. Too often you will see a new building go up right next to an old, unused one. That seems ludicrous to me.
Some towns in NJ are allowing residential properties to be sold, the large old homes torn down and replaced with two or more on the same lot.
What are we truly gaining and what are we really losing? Are we becoming a nation of McMansions and hard-hearts with no feeling for our past?

FuriousAvatar · 09-23-2006, 10:24 PM

Oftentimes we lose the idea and the feeling of our own history to alleged progress. In my mind it's hard to project a path ahead through darkness if there's no light behind us to show the way. Our heritage and past can give us valuable insights into what we should do next, and where to go. As an individual, we would be nothing without our past, mere shells simply existing from event to event, with nothing to show. The same holds true for a culture, a nation, a race, or even the world. There's no way to reference where we are if we cannot compare it to where we've been.

Ch'i · 09-23-2006, 11:13 PM

Buildings aren't that important, but we should definately keep track of our history.

Ustwo · 09-23-2006, 11:16 PM

I'm a big history buff, but sometimes its best to tear down the old to make way for the new.

Old homes are great to look at, give you a feel for the time, but I want central air, proper insulation and wiring, and wide open spaces over the tiny rooms of old.

While there is nothing more I like then visiting old ruins, and I know I have a much better sense of history than most, but I don't think property owners should be forced to keep any structure that doesn't have deep historical significance.

At the time those homes were built they were nothing special, and in 60 years their will most likely be a group trying to save the McMansions.

Daniel_ · 09-24-2006, 04:05 AM

I live in a fully modernised 120 year old house, so I have to agree with ng.

That said - in my town the oldest homes were built in the 1100s, so mine is one of the new ones.

Gilda · 09-24-2006, 06:00 AM

Preserve buildings of historical significance, of course. Old, though, doesn't necessarily equate to historic. When we moved we had a house in progress customized to our needs during construction, something that could not be done with an older house, and there really weren't any older houses that had exactly what we wanted, large rooms and an expansive master suite in particular. I love that our master suite is larger than my first apartment and the modern great room arrangement of family room/breakfast nook/kitchen all connected in a single living space.

While I like the idea of an older house, I like the idea of having one customized to my needs and tastes even more.

ngdawg · 09-24-2006, 04:23 PM

The house I live in was built about 1915; the owner/builder owned this entire block save for two other houses.
It's a very basic house, 6 rooms. When we bought it, it had steam radiators, woodcasing windows, and one electric outlet upstairs. Our bedroom furniture didn't fit in one room and we had to cover the windows of the room we slept in with plastic and blankets and even then, with a good wind, the blanket would sway. We replaced the heating, the windows, put in electric, expanded both rooms upstairs, from each 10x10 to ours 10x16 and the other, 10x14. There's still a lot of things that need to be done, but it's home.
I realize some people can't 'do' old. What really gets my blood boiling is not only the tearing down of fine old houses and buildings, but the destruction of land. NJ has a farm preservation department and a Greenacres fund as well, but not much in the way of saving or preserving woodlands. Even the Pinelands, one of the most important ecosystems on the east coast, allows some clearing and building;
there are many 'lost' villages within the Pinelands, towns that once were booming and have long been abandoned. We are in danger of losing them entirely. Six Flags-Great Adventure was built on a filled-in cedar lake in the Pinelands and the resulting boon to the area has decimated many village clusters.
My passion for these old things is both aesthetic and connective. No concrete and steel has half the appeal and charm of old carved wood, old paint and buccolic atmosphere.

TexanAvenger · 09-24-2006, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

My passion for these old things is both aesthetic and connective. No concrete and steel has half the appeal and charm of old carved wood, old paint and buccolic atmosphere.

My biggest objection to the destruction, the "progress," of land, as in many other things, is the unwillingness for compromise.

I am aware that changes must occur, that the world must move on, that people want and need to expand... but I cannot understand the aversity of people to save something of the past in the march toward the future.

Seaver · 09-24-2006, 06:19 PM

I love history, and I love old homes.

HOWEVER, to claim there's a sudden loss of respect for history is strange to me. Those old houses were state-of-the-art when they were built. There were older models that they burned down simply for nails, they did not care for the older models, to claim that we lost that respect is just strange.

Ustwo · 09-24-2006, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

I love history, and I love old homes.

HOWEVER, to claim there's a sudden loss of respect for history is strange to me. Those old houses were state-of-the-art when they were built. There were older models that they burned down simply for nails, they did not care for the older models, to claim that we lost that respect is just strange.

History is about people, the places might help you understand the people, but without their stories its just an old house. Most people don't even know what their great grandparents did for a living, or even the names of all of them. Its going to get worse in that respect with people having kids so late in this country.

Old homes are nice to look at, but I'm home shopping currently and it will mostly be a version of a McMansion but with some privacy. Can't stand the back to back subdivisions myself.

ngdawg · 09-24-2006, 06:39 PM

Based on that NPR feed, it would seem we have lost respect for history. In the town of the 100 year old Michelin Rubber Factory, 10 years ago they wanted to rehabilitate at least some of the complex, now they're talking just tearing the whole thing down. It's solid, it's freakin huge and if those bricks were food, no one in the world would go hungry. The town was founded because of it and now it's 'just an eyesore'.
Eminent domain is being used for profit-based redevelopment in many areas with no respect for contribution, history or aesthetics.
I wouldn't even mind seeing something like reusing the materials if a site is beyond rehabilitation, but when is that ever done?
The below building is part of the Helm Snuff factory in NJ and is, as of last week, now gone. Granted, it looks pretty pathetic, but someone with just a little foresight and respect could at least used portions of this complex to build their condos. This complex had parts that were over 100 years old and the town took its name from it, Helmetta.

Ustwo · 09-24-2006, 06:43 PM

I'm sorry thats an ugly rundown box made out of bricks.

I'd have knocked it down too. Its not like you can magically make a old building fit current needs and standards. Sure its soild, they didn't have a choice in those days, though soild doesn't mean its any stronger, just heavier.

It has no artistic value, it has no functional value, its going to cost way more to convert it to something useful.

As for resusing materials, if you mean at the same site, most likely not very often, but bricks themselves are often recycled.

I'm sorry but thats just an eye sore.

ngdawg · 09-24-2006, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I'm sorry thats an ugly rundown box made out of bricks.

I'd have knocked it down too. Its not like you can magically make a old building fit current needs and standards. Sure its soild, they didn't have a choice in those days, though soild doesn't mean its any stronger, just heavier.

It has no artistic value, it has no functional value, its going to cost way more to convert it to something useful.

As for resusing materials, if you mean at the same site, most likely not very often, but bricks themselves are often recycled.

I'm sorry but thats just an eye sore.

Yea, as that is, it is an eyesore, but most if it (the site) was pretty cool.( Iposted that one to show the size) The bricks will probably go to a recycled materials business, but I mean reuse them right there; either as paving, new walls, etc.
One factory in the same town as the Michelin one did get rehabilitated into very expensive condos-they even left the original entrances and interior brick walls, with remortaring and adding things like new windows, an extension to the back and penthouse style 5th floor. It's really beautiful. Unfortunately, that is not done very often. In Jersey City, Secaucus and Hoboken, old factories are being turned into condos and in Kansas City, an entire district has been rehabilitated into an arts community. It can be done; it just seems tearing down and/or encroachment is the quicker and cheapest way and there needs to be more incentive for them not to be.
This is some of the detail of that same eyesore. To me, this looks perfectly rehabitable and the brickwork is very attractive-probably the older part of the complex.

Seaver · 09-24-2006, 08:06 PM

Yes dawg, it can and does happen. However the economics have to be there. Look at the area surrounding the site, would you want your kids playing around that location? Are there other ratty and condemned buildings? Are there homeless squatters in the area?

These matter when someone looks to rebuild. It is a MASSIVE project to bring old buildings up to code. Completely re-piping, re-wiring, replacing the walls and floors, installing new locations for appliances. It's not like you're simply installing new cabinates, the entire building would have to be altered save for the bricks.

ngdawg · 09-24-2006, 09:01 PM

That's why I think there should be more incentives given toward preserving, via tax cuts, funding, etc.
I do remember some cities, like Baltimore, many years ago, sold inner city townhomes for $1 with certain contingencies, such as the buyer couldn't turn around and sell outright, they had to fix their purchase up, live in it one year, etc.
In the case of the Kansas City downtown revival, that was done under urban renewal grants. The buildings remain, they're just refurbished. It's been about two years and there's still work to be done, but it's a fantastic idea-designating a city area to arts, community and preservation.

Carno · 09-24-2006, 09:08 PM

I suggest razing all of NJ and starting over again from scratch.

Seaver · 09-24-2006, 09:35 PM

Quote:

That's why I think there should be more incentives given toward preserving, via tax cuts, funding, etc.

I would rather the money go to fixing roads or rebuilding schools.

Quote:

In the case of the Kansas City downtown revival, that was done under urban renewal grants. The buildings remain, they're just refurbished. It's been about two years and there's still work to be done, but it's a fantastic idea-designating a city area to arts, community and preservation.

It's downtown with a booming city because of NAFTA. Prices in those areas are expected to increase, so the economics to build there are already in place. Here in Austin they get $0 for rebuilding or fixing up crappy locations, but people are tripping over each other attempting to buy out the old 1800-1900 buildings. They rebuild them into bars/clubs, stores, and even homes in the middle of downtown.

ngdawg · 09-26-2006, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

I would rather the money go to fixing roads or rebuilding schools.

It's downtown with a booming city because of NAFTA. Prices in those areas are expected to increase, so the economics to build there are already in place. Here in Austin they get $0 for rebuilding or fixing up crappy locations, but people are tripping over each other attempting to buy out the old 1800-1900 buildings. They rebuild them into bars/clubs, stores, and even homes in the middle of downtown.

I'm curious-what's NAFTA have to do with an arts community boon?

Painted · 09-30-2006, 03:40 PM

I would much rather have to look at a run-down brick building than _another_ housing development with stucco walls and huge ugly garages. It makes me sad to see quaint ranch homes being bulldozed into Burger Kings.

However...I suppose that's been a problem for a long time. My pops remembers less than 30 years ago when this town wasn't more than a drive in movie place and ranches, and his pops remembered when this town wasn't more than forests and cows...and so on. But they sure as hell don't make new buildings like they used to...

_God_ · 09-30-2006, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I'm a big history buff, but sometimes its best to tear down the old to make way for the new.

Old homes are great to look at, give you a feel for the time, but I want central air, proper insulation and wiring, and wide open spaces over the tiny rooms of old.

While there is nothing more I like then visiting old ruins, and I know I have a much better sense of history than most, but I don't think property owners should be forced to keep any structure that doesn't have deep historical significance.

At the time those homes were built they were nothing special, and in 60 years their will most likely be a group trying to save the McMansions.

It was good that I read this before posting the exact same thing myself. In my community recently, a coalition of busybodies decided to dictate to a homeowner (whom I don't even know) that he couldn't tear down his "cottage." Never mind that it was termite-infested, with shot wiring and plumbing.

My solution: Take a frigging picture of it for historical purposes, then clean it up. If someone is sufficiently motivated to BUY a scraper from the owner, that's different. It never happens, though--it's always a bunch of people who want to enforce their idea of right and wrong on everyone else. They almost never volunteer any of their OWN money, either, although they want to make decisions that can cost millions to the owner of the property.

This is not an attack on you, ngdawg, and I think, properly handled, that your attitude is a great one. I just had to vent a little adrenaline from this situation, and from one I experienced personally.

SugahBritches · 10-01-2006, 05:51 AM

Aaaah......the lost art of things long gone....

So much of our heritage is going out the window and it's not just the old houses/buildings of our communities. I live 5 miles from a smalltown that took it upon themselves to save the old buildings right in the middle of their town. I think it's great that a community of people can work together to save some of the past for future generations to see.

NG, there are many old southern cities that have come to the plate and made sure some of the old building and houses are remodled and renivated. Have you been to Savannah, GA? They have somehow managed to save some of the buildings and restore some of that old past feeling.

It is ashame that some folks don't come to a compromise and coming to a solution to keep some of these buildings alive.

My daughter is majoring in Building Construction and even she has the love/foresight to see that somethings are important to keep the past history alive. But, she also knows that "progress" must go on.

It's a tit for tat situation NG.......but hopefully we get to keep a tit now and again.

ngdawg · 10-01-2006, 09:37 AM

I love Savannah, been there twice. River St is a great example of rehabiliation-old factors turned into shops, condos, restaurants, etc., for the tourist trade. (Factors were the warehouses along the river that received the goods off ships, mainly cotton in Savannah)
Perth Amboy, NJ, however, took a different approach to its riverfront by tearing down old factors to rebuild, a scenario more often than not used.
The photo below is of the Boy Scouts of America's former national headquarters in New Jersey. Note the Art Deco exterior. They moved out of that building almost 20 years ago and it's been vacant since. Demolition of it has started this past week for something we all need more of-a freaking mall.

SugahBritches · 10-01-2006, 09:50 AM

OH WOW!!! That front is fantastic!! That is such a shame NG. But, I sure know how you feel girl.

Live Oak is the boss and my hometown where we grew up. It's a prime example of older buildings from way back in the late 1800's early 1900's. Live Oak is really considered new by today's standards. That is if you think of the oldest cities in the USA. Actually, the oldest city in Florida is St. Augustine.

Here is some old pics of our hometown in Live Oak.

The first one is of 1906. The last three are of 1948.

Seaver · 10-01-2006, 11:34 AM

Quote:

I'm curious-what's NAFTA have to do with an arts community boon?

NAFTA is creating boom in every city between Laredo and Kansas City which resides on I-35. These booms increase property values to the point of either spending lots to build new sites far away, or spend equally lots of money downtown. Matched with increased traffic problems because of the large supply of trucks people do not want to build far away. Therefor they look inward and rebuild the downtown districts.

09-23-2006, 09:39 PM	#1 (permalink)
ngdawg peekaboo Location: on the back, bitch	Progress? Are we losing our history? Route 15 I've always been intrigued by old buildings, houses, etc. I even bought an old house because I can't stand new ones. Lately, I've turned that life-long love of the old into a semi-hobby-going to sites about to be demolished and (probably trespassing), taking a lot of photographs. This story, along with another, Wildwoods are frightening to me. Once something is gone, it's gone. I realize there has to be 'progress', but it seems to come at a total disregard for heritage, history, culture. While some towns, like Cape May, NJ, embrace their heritage and make strides to revive it, others, like Wildwood, seem to want to dump it. I grew up in a small town next to the Delaware River. We were known as hicks, but the town has a wealth of history. Thomas Payne lived there, Joseph Bonaparte (Napoleon's brother) had an estate there. It was home to one of the oldest military schools in the country and is home to the first school founded by Clara Barton. But the historic homes back when I was growing up there had become rentals, divided into apartments, cheaply sided and run down. In the past 15 years though, it's become a quaint and rather expensive village with these homes beautifully restored back to single family dwellings. What price should we pay for progress? Should laws be in place that would help more to preserve the fading architecture of old? Personally, I feel there should be much more incentive to revive old buildings to new use. Too often you will see a new building go up right next to an old, unused one. That seems ludicrous to me. Some towns in NJ are allowing residential properties to be sold, the large old homes torn down and replaced with two or more on the same lot. What are we truly gaining and what are we really losing? Are we becoming a nation of McMansions and hard-hearts with no feeling for our past? __________________ Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

09-23-2006, 11:13 PM	#3 (permalink)
Ch'i Artist of Life	Buildings aren't that important, but we should definately keep track of our history. Last edited by Ch'i; 09-23-2006 at 11:19 PM..

09-23-2006, 11:16 PM	#4 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	I'm a big history buff, but sometimes its best to tear down the old to make way for the new. Old homes are great to look at, give you a feel for the time, but I want central air, proper insulation and wiring, and wide open spaces over the tiny rooms of old. While there is nothing more I like then visiting old ruins, and I know I have a much better sense of history than most, but I don't think property owners should be forced to keep any structure that doesn't have deep historical significance. At the time those homes were built they were nothing special, and in 60 years their will most likely be a group trying to save the McMansions. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

09-24-2006, 04:05 AM	#5 (permalink)
Daniel_ Evil Priest: The Devil Made Me Do It! Location: Southern England	I live in a fully modernised 120 year old house, so I have to agree with ng. That said - in my town the oldest homes were built in the 1100s, so mine is one of the new ones. __________________ ╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗ Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air, And deep beneath the rolling waves, In labyrinths of Coral Caves, The Echo of a distant time Comes willowing across the sand; And everthing is Green and Submarine ╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

09-24-2006, 06:00 AM	#6 (permalink)
Gilda 32 flavors and then some Location: Out on a wire.	Preserve buildings of historical significance, of course. Old, though, doesn't necessarily equate to historic. When we moved we had a house in progress customized to our needs during construction, something that could not be done with an older house, and there really weren't any older houses that had exactly what we wanted, large rooms and an expansive master suite in particular. I love that our master suite is larger than my first apartment and the modern great room arrangement of family room/breakfast nook/kitchen all connected in a single living space. While I like the idea of an older house, I like the idea of having one customized to my needs and tastes even more. __________________ I'm against ending blackness. I believe that everyone has a right to be black, it's a choice, and I support that. ~Steven Colbert

09-23-2006, 10:24 PM	#2 (permalink)
FuriousAvatar Crazy Location: Juneau, Alaska	Oftentimes we lose the idea and the feeling of our own history to alleged progress. In my mind it's hard to project a path ahead through darkness if there's no light behind us to show the way. Our heritage and past can give us valuable insights into what we should do next, and where to go. As an individual, we would be nothing without our past, mere shells simply existing from event to event, with nothing to show. The same holds true for a culture, a nation, a race, or even the world. There's no way to reference where we are if we cannot compare it to where we've been.

09-24-2006, 04:23 PM	#7 (permalink)
ngdawg peekaboo Location: on the back, bitch	The house I live in was built about 1915; the owner/builder owned this entire block save for two other houses. It's a very basic house, 6 rooms. When we bought it, it had steam radiators, woodcasing windows, and one electric outlet upstairs. Our bedroom furniture didn't fit in one room and we had to cover the windows of the room we slept in with plastic and blankets and even then, with a good wind, the blanket would sway. We replaced the heating, the windows, put in electric, expanded both rooms upstairs, from each 10x10 to ours 10x16 and the other, 10x14. There's still a lot of things that need to be done, but it's home. I realize some people can't 'do' old. What really gets my blood boiling is not only the tearing down of fine old houses and buildings, but the destruction of land. NJ has a farm preservation department and a Greenacres fund as well, but not much in the way of saving or preserving woodlands. Even the Pinelands, one of the most important ecosystems on the east coast, allows some clearing and building; there are many 'lost' villages within the Pinelands, towns that once were booming and have long been abandoned. We are in danger of losing them entirely. Six Flags-Great Adventure was built on a filled-in cedar lake in the Pinelands and the resulting boon to the area has decimated many village clusters. My passion for these old things is both aesthetic and connective. No concrete and steel has half the appeal and charm of old carved wood, old paint and buccolic atmosphere. __________________ Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

09-24-2006, 06:19 PM	#9 (permalink)
Seaver Junkie Location: Fort Worth, TX	I love history, and I love old homes. HOWEVER, to claim there's a sudden loss of respect for history is strange to me. Those old houses were state-of-the-art when they were built. There were older models that they burned down simply for nails, they did not care for the older models, to claim that we lost that respect is just strange. __________________ "Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

09-24-2006, 06:39 PM	#11 (permalink)
ngdawg peekaboo Location: on the back, bitch	Based on that NPR feed, it would seem we have lost respect for history. In the town of the 100 year old Michelin Rubber Factory, 10 years ago they wanted to rehabilitate at least some of the complex, now they're talking just tearing the whole thing down. It's solid, it's freakin huge and if those bricks were food, no one in the world would go hungry. The town was founded because of it and now it's 'just an eyesore'. Eminent domain is being used for profit-based redevelopment in many areas with no respect for contribution, history or aesthetics. I wouldn't even mind seeing something like reusing the materials if a site is beyond rehabilitation, but when is that ever done? The below building is part of the Helm Snuff factory in NJ and is, as of last week, now gone. Granted, it looks pretty pathetic, but someone with just a little foresight and respect could at least used portions of this complex to build their condos. This complex had parts that were over 100 years old and the town took its name from it, Helmetta. __________________ Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

09-24-2006, 06:43 PM	#12 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	I'm sorry thats an ugly rundown box made out of bricks. I'd have knocked it down too. Its not like you can magically make a old building fit current needs and standards. Sure its soild, they didn't have a choice in those days, though soild doesn't mean its any stronger, just heavier. It has no artistic value, it has no functional value, its going to cost way more to convert it to something useful. As for resusing materials, if you mean at the same site, most likely not very often, but bricks themselves are often recycled. I'm sorry but thats just an eye sore. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

09-24-2006, 08:06 PM	#14 (permalink)
Seaver Junkie Location: Fort Worth, TX	Yes dawg, it can and does happen. However the economics have to be there. Look at the area surrounding the site, would you want your kids playing around that location? Are there other ratty and condemned buildings? Are there homeless squatters in the area? These matter when someone looks to rebuild. It is a MASSIVE project to bring old buildings up to code. Completely re-piping, re-wiring, replacing the walls and floors, installing new locations for appliances. It's not like you're simply installing new cabinates, the entire building would have to be altered save for the bricks. __________________ "Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

09-24-2006, 09:01 PM	#15 (permalink)
ngdawg peekaboo Location: on the back, bitch	That's why I think there should be more incentives given toward preserving, via tax cuts, funding, etc. I do remember some cities, like Baltimore, many years ago, sold inner city townhomes for $1 with certain contingencies, such as the buyer couldn't turn around and sell outright, they had to fix their purchase up, live in it one year, etc. In the case of the Kansas City downtown revival, that was done under urban renewal grants. The buildings remain, they're just refurbished. It's been about two years and there's still work to be done, but it's a fantastic idea-designating a city area to arts, community and preservation. __________________ Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

09-24-2006, 09:08 PM	#16 (permalink)
Carno Junkie	I suggest razing all of NJ and starting over again from scratch. __________________ http://how-to-spell-ridiculous.com/

09-30-2006, 03:40 PM	#19 (permalink)
Painted Pleasure Burn	I would much rather have to look at a run-down brick building than _another_ housing development with stucco walls and huge ugly garages. It makes me sad to see quaint ranch homes being bulldozed into Burger Kings. However...I suppose that's been a problem for a long time. My pops remembers less than 30 years ago when this town wasn't more than a drive in movie place and ranches, and his pops remembered when this town wasn't more than forests and cows...and so on. But they sure as hell don't make new buildings like they used to...

10-01-2006, 05:51 AM	#21 (permalink)
SugahBritches Insane	Aaaah......the lost art of things long gone.... So much of our heritage is going out the window and it's not just the old houses/buildings of our communities. I live 5 miles from a smalltown that took it upon themselves to save the old buildings right in the middle of their town. I think it's great that a community of people can work together to save some of the past for future generations to see. NG, there are many old southern cities that have come to the plate and made sure some of the old building and houses are remodled and renivated. Have you been to Savannah, GA? They have somehow managed to save some of the buildings and restore some of that old past feeling. It is ashame that some folks don't come to a compromise and coming to a solution to keep some of these buildings alive. My daughter is majoring in Building Construction and even she has the love/foresight to see that somethings are important to keep the past history alive. But, she also knows that "progress" must go on. It's a tit for tat situation NG.......but hopefully we get to keep a tit now and again.

10-01-2006, 09:37 AM	#22 (permalink)
ngdawg peekaboo Location: on the back, bitch	I love Savannah, been there twice. River St is a great example of rehabiliation-old factors turned into shops, condos, restaurants, etc., for the tourist trade. (Factors were the warehouses along the river that received the goods off ships, mainly cotton in Savannah) Perth Amboy, NJ, however, took a different approach to its riverfront by tearing down old factors to rebuild, a scenario more often than not used. The photo below is of the Boy Scouts of America's former national headquarters in New Jersey. Note the Art Deco exterior. They moved out of that building almost 20 years ago and it's been vacant since. Demolition of it has started this past week for something we all need more of-a freaking mall. __________________ Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

10-01-2006, 09:50 AM	#23 (permalink)
SugahBritches Insane	OH WOW!!! That front is fantastic!! That is such a shame NG. But, I sure know how you feel girl. Live Oak is the boss and my hometown where we grew up. It's a prime example of older buildings from way back in the late 1800's early 1900's. Live Oak is really considered new by today's standards. That is if you think of the oldest cities in the USA. Actually, the oldest city in Florida is St. Augustine. Here is some old pics of our hometown in Live Oak. The first one is of 1906. The last three are of 1948.