Too busy to blog
…at both home and work…
Though I would like to say that I find the Park District’s backpedaling rather amusing.
Journal Star: “I believe the ordinance we would ultimately adopt would likely go further” than the city’s historic preservation ordinance, Cassidy said.
Cassidy added the park board has significant funds planned for restoration of many of these structures, including $200,000 to $250,000 for restoration of the cannon wall.
Wait a minute… it was about this time last year that they secured a bid to tear down the cannon wall. Now they’re the preservationists? Why the sudden change of heart!?
Update for clarification purposes on my off the cuff commentary: I really don’t want the park or the structures in it to be designated as landmarks, I just want the Park District to do the right thing. I agree wholeheartedly with CJ Summers who says this: “The situation now has the City holding the Park District’s feet to the fire to follow through on their stated historic preservation plans in a timely manner. Hopefully that will be all that’s necessary, and on June 5 the council request can be voted down.”
And I really am too busy to blog…
April 25th, 2007 at 8:45 am
Maybe the cost of demolition was in the same cost neighborhood as fixing it?
April 25th, 2007 at 8:58 am
If so, and I don’t have the figures in front of me, why choose demolition?
I’m waiting for them to say they can save the suspension bridge next, because I’ve been told that they consider it un-salvageable.