Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The citizen web site is now set up to accept donations (or pledges) to be able to relocate / preserve the house. Saving this house is now a possibility within reach.
As you can tell from my username, preservation is near and dear to my heart. So much so that I have a degree in it. However, the idea that preservation prevents progress is ridiculously false and outdated. Progressive preservationists realized some time ago that adaptive reuse is the way. No one approached the developer and asked him to save the building for the heck of it. They asked him to incorporate it into his design, to reuse it, to adapt it for use into his plan. It's been done in other developments but the concept seemed to evade him.
Now a donor has stepped forward to help move the property. More details are in the works.
The concept that only properties of national historical significance should be saved is flawed. Sometimes we can't gauge significance at the time. Did you know that the first historic preservation success story was Mount Vernon? Of course, George Washington's house should be saved! But in the 1850s when our country was roughly 75 years old, the house was endangered and no one seemed to be worried. Fortunately one woman stepped forward and engineered a fund raising campaign. Can you imagine what would have happened if she hadn't? My point exactly. Mount Vernon wasn't of historic significance to most people back then.
Even beyond the "what ifs", we lose our sense of place when we tear down our history. What's stopping Greenville from becoming Charlotte or Atlanta? Nothing save for people like me. We want a sense of place not another homogenized development that would be at home in any city in the US. But with that said, I still believe that we can create special places that encourage development without the loss of our history. Heck I love shopping at Anthro and eating at Tupelo Honey, but I could have done that in the Woolworth's. If it had been restored to its former glory, it could have easily housed those businesses. Now it's gone with only a hoky statue to honor it.
I do agree that every mill village needs to be saved. In my past life, I was in charge of making recommendations about properties and their significance. Judson Mill was one of the villages that I said was not "eligible". The mill was drastically changed and the homes have been added on to so that they don't resemble their original appearances. The significance has been lost, therefore they are no longer "historic". You'd be surprised how many properties are turned down for being old and not historic. There is a complex process and it's not as arbitrary as a lot of people would like to think.
Not sure what you mean by saying what's stopping Greenville from becoming Charlotte or Atlanta. It won't be either anytime soon and there are many reasons why. If you would quit playing cheerleader for Greenville, you would understand that there are many many great structures in places like Charlotte, Atlanta, Greenville, Columbia, Charleston etc.....
The Upcountry History Museum is hosting an event Wednesday evening to educate people about Wilkins House and what they can to do help. The event is free and goes from 6-8 p.m.
Not sure what you mean by saying what's stopping Greenville from becoming Charlotte or Atlanta. It won't be either anytime soon and there are many reasons why. If you would quit playing cheerleader for Greenville, you would understand that there are many many great structures in places like Charlotte, Atlanta, Greenville, Columbia, Charleston etc.....
My comments have absolutely nothing to do with being a cheerleader for Greenville. In fact, this subject brings out all of my criticisms of Greenville. You seem to have very little knowledge of the dynamics and history of urban planning and historic preservation. Yes, there are many great structures in Charlotte, Atlanta, Columbia, and Charleston. Interestingly enough, I've lived in all of those cities, save for Charlotte, but I am familiar with the area. I went to school in Charleston where I studied (gasp) historic preservation. So I know better than the average joe about these things.
What I alluded to was that both Charlotte and Atlanta are "new" cities in that they developed mostly after the Civil War when those who were in the know were eager to shed the Old South for the New South. There are isolated pockets of historic buildings in both cities. But many, many historic buildings were lost to Urban Renewal and the subsequent waves of development in the 1970s and 1980s as traditional downtowns and their neighboring historic areas were lost to the suburbs. Greenville is under a great deal of development pressure. And even though downtown development and historic preservation are both the "in" things now, Greenville seems to be oblivious to this. Perhaps those in charge think that the accolades of the Main Street area and West End can cover over the sins of allowing historic properties fall to the wrecking ball. What is needed in Greenville is comprehensive design review on a multitude of areas. There are several locally designated neighborhoods that fall under the jurisdiction of the city's design review board, but there are many unprotected areas. The Wilkins Mansion is just one of the victims of this policy. Another recent loss, the Cureton House, is another example of the devastation being wrecked upon the traditional historic area of Augusta Street.
In other news, the Wilkins Mansion is receiving a lot of positive attention. About a third of the goal ($360,000) has been raised. All donations are tax deductible and every donor will be invited to a reception to be held before the house is moved.
My comments have absolutely nothing to do with being a cheerleader for Greenville. In fact, this subject brings out all of my criticisms of Greenville. You seem to have very little knowledge of the dynamics and history of urban planning and historic preservation. Yes, there are many great structures in Charlotte, Atlanta, Columbia, and Charleston. Interestingly enough, I've lived in all of those cities, save for Charlotte, but I am familiar with the area. I went to school in Charleston where I studied (gasp) historic preservation. So I know better than the average joe about these things.
What I alluded to was that both Charlotte and Atlanta are "new" cities in that they developed mostly after the Civil War when those who were in the know were eager to shed the Old South for the New South. There are isolated pockets of historic buildings in both cities. But many, many historic buildings were lost to Urban Renewal and the subsequent waves of development in the 1970s and 1980s as traditional downtowns and their neighboring historic areas were lost to the suburbs. Greenville is under a great deal of development pressure. And even though downtown development and historic preservation are both the "in" things now, Greenville seems to be oblivious to this. Perhaps those in charge think that the accolades of the Main Street area and West End can cover over the sins of allowing historic properties fall to the wrecking ball. What is needed in Greenville is comprehensive design review on a multitude of areas. There are several locally designated neighborhoods that fall under the jurisdiction of the city's design review board, but there are many unprotected areas. The Wilkins Mansion is just one of the victims of this policy. Another recent loss, the Cureton House, is another example of the devastation being wrecked upon the traditional historic area of Augusta Street.
In other news, the Wilkins Mansion is receiving a lot of positive attention. About a third of the goal ($360,000) has been raised. All donations are tax deductible and every donor will be invited to a reception to be held before the house is moved.
You are absolutely correct. After WWII Europeans, especially Germans rebuilt structures that Americans would have dismissed as piles of brick. I suppose our lack of historical perspective overall as a nation is the reason it is often hard to find many that understand when you talk about the cities that sold their urban souls to the devil for any growth they could get. Most of those cities regret this immensely once they have matured enough to understand the imbalance they have created. Boosters that don't believe anything can be too big or too tall are almost entirely American. However, I am glad to write that a newer generation seems to have grasped that density does not mean bigness or height necessarily.
There is no place in Atlanta like dt Greenville, and it can't be built. So thanks to people like yourself, some cities, perhaps including Greenville will be saved from the HINEs and CROWs and PORTMANs of the country and allowed to mature in a healthy and wellbalanced way. Even people under fifty don't have a clue what many of America's cities have lost chasing the development buck.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
