July 23, 2014 at 2:10 p.m.
Saving building was wise (6/3/04)
Editor's Mailbag
By To the editor:-
As a former Jay County resident I would like to comment on the efforts to restore and reuse the Weiler Building in downtown Portland as I read about in the Commercial Review online last week.
I am currently a part of a large urban planning and landscape architecture firm in the Washington D.C. area and can truly appreciate the efforts being made to keep and reuse a significant building. It seems that over the years, towns, especially small towns, tend to let buildings fall into a dilapidated state along their main streets.
All too often these structures are so neglected that they are razed because they are either unsafe or it is the most “cost effective” thing to do. The town of Dunkirk is just the latest example of this disturbing trend.
When a downtown building is removed or replaced with a parking lot it destroys the look and feel of the overall street. Drive down any of these towns’ main streets — Pennville, Dunkirk, Redkey, Albany — and you will come across empty lots or parking lots where buildings once stood. These downtowns are slowly dying. You might not notice it over the course of a couple years but think back — think back to what main street was like in your childhood or how your parents or grandparents remembered it.
Sure there are a lot of reasons that we can all think of to justify why buildings are lost. One is that these small towns no longer have the same population numbers that they once had. A second is that the buildings are not owned by the city governments but rather by individuals spread across the country who are difficult at best to get a hold of. Yet another is that the buildings are just old and, “we need more parking downtown.”
For a downtown to survive you have to have people — simple as that. People to live, work, dine, shop, entertain, and yes, go to school. If you add people to a downtown area it makes common sense that other businesses and people will follow. People walking along a sidewalk is the most powerful indicator of a vibrant downtown and as you take businesses and buildings away from that main street you remove any reason for people to be there at all. Small towns tend to think the answer is adding nice street lights, benches, brick sidewalks and trees, but why bother if no one is there to use and enjoy them.
I see brand new communities being designed and built that are trying their hardest to have what Portland, Dunkirk and Redkey once had. I see small towns in the D.C. area that are successfully bringing back life to their communities by investing in the restoration and rehabilitation of their downtown buildings. I rarely in this area see a building such as the Weiler Building or the old Portland High School lost to the wrecking ball. We simply don’t let it happen. Why is that? Could it be that our attitudes are different about saving historic buildings? We know that it is not a money issue as most times it’s more cost effective to restore and reuse an existing building rather than to replace it.
I believe that people with very good intentions tend to twist and exaggerate numbers when it comes to justifying why a historic building should be replaced. They all too often forget to calculate one very important number — the cost of the building’s personal and historical significance to the community. I am a young 27 years of age, but I remember being in the buildings that housed Portland and Dunkirk High Schools as a little kid with my parents to watch different events in the gyms and auditoriums. I remember being in the Weiler Building to shop for furniture.
The key to saving a building is having an occupant. A building is made to be used just as a car is made to be driven (for all of you true historic car buffs out there). As soon as the building is empty it begins to rapidly decay. It is all caused by a process called Urban Sprawl. You can see effects from urban sprawl on a larger scale in many cities of many sizes from Muncie, Indiana to Detroit, Michigan. It is a lot more complicated than I am making it out to be. Many reasons and pieces of information need to be considered when it comes to saving one’s downtown. I invite you all to visit a couple of Internet sites or read books to learn more about topic.
To make a full circle, I am excited that a building in a small town is being saved. It seems to be a rarity.
Thank you to the John Jay Center for Learning and the community of Portland for their efforts to save this icon of the past. It is just one building in the grand scheme of things but it is a huge step in the right direction of creating a vibrant downtown — a place that you can all be proud of. Enjoy your new home.
Chad Rinker
Alexandria, Va.[[In-content Ad]]
I am currently a part of a large urban planning and landscape architecture firm in the Washington D.C. area and can truly appreciate the efforts being made to keep and reuse a significant building. It seems that over the years, towns, especially small towns, tend to let buildings fall into a dilapidated state along their main streets.
All too often these structures are so neglected that they are razed because they are either unsafe or it is the most “cost effective” thing to do. The town of Dunkirk is just the latest example of this disturbing trend.
When a downtown building is removed or replaced with a parking lot it destroys the look and feel of the overall street. Drive down any of these towns’ main streets — Pennville, Dunkirk, Redkey, Albany — and you will come across empty lots or parking lots where buildings once stood. These downtowns are slowly dying. You might not notice it over the course of a couple years but think back — think back to what main street was like in your childhood or how your parents or grandparents remembered it.
Sure there are a lot of reasons that we can all think of to justify why buildings are lost. One is that these small towns no longer have the same population numbers that they once had. A second is that the buildings are not owned by the city governments but rather by individuals spread across the country who are difficult at best to get a hold of. Yet another is that the buildings are just old and, “we need more parking downtown.”
For a downtown to survive you have to have people — simple as that. People to live, work, dine, shop, entertain, and yes, go to school. If you add people to a downtown area it makes common sense that other businesses and people will follow. People walking along a sidewalk is the most powerful indicator of a vibrant downtown and as you take businesses and buildings away from that main street you remove any reason for people to be there at all. Small towns tend to think the answer is adding nice street lights, benches, brick sidewalks and trees, but why bother if no one is there to use and enjoy them.
I see brand new communities being designed and built that are trying their hardest to have what Portland, Dunkirk and Redkey once had. I see small towns in the D.C. area that are successfully bringing back life to their communities by investing in the restoration and rehabilitation of their downtown buildings. I rarely in this area see a building such as the Weiler Building or the old Portland High School lost to the wrecking ball. We simply don’t let it happen. Why is that? Could it be that our attitudes are different about saving historic buildings? We know that it is not a money issue as most times it’s more cost effective to restore and reuse an existing building rather than to replace it.
I believe that people with very good intentions tend to twist and exaggerate numbers when it comes to justifying why a historic building should be replaced. They all too often forget to calculate one very important number — the cost of the building’s personal and historical significance to the community. I am a young 27 years of age, but I remember being in the buildings that housed Portland and Dunkirk High Schools as a little kid with my parents to watch different events in the gyms and auditoriums. I remember being in the Weiler Building to shop for furniture.
The key to saving a building is having an occupant. A building is made to be used just as a car is made to be driven (for all of you true historic car buffs out there). As soon as the building is empty it begins to rapidly decay. It is all caused by a process called Urban Sprawl. You can see effects from urban sprawl on a larger scale in many cities of many sizes from Muncie, Indiana to Detroit, Michigan. It is a lot more complicated than I am making it out to be. Many reasons and pieces of information need to be considered when it comes to saving one’s downtown. I invite you all to visit a couple of Internet sites or read books to learn more about topic.
To make a full circle, I am excited that a building in a small town is being saved. It seems to be a rarity.
Thank you to the John Jay Center for Learning and the community of Portland for their efforts to save this icon of the past. It is just one building in the grand scheme of things but it is a huge step in the right direction of creating a vibrant downtown — a place that you can all be proud of. Enjoy your new home.
Chad Rinker
Alexandria, Va.[[In-content Ad]]
Top Stories
9/11 NEVER FORGET Mobile Exhibit
Chartwells marketing
September 17, 2024 7:36 a.m.
Events
250 X 250 AD