Connecticut’s Historic Character Lost (Hartford, West Hartford: apartments, lease, condominium)
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.
I know that Westport has a process that notifies people of the demolition of homes older than 50 years. Fairfield has an ordinance that protects homes that are 100 years or older. I think more towns should do the same. Jay
I'm spending a lot of money to visit your area, & part of it is for the historical significance...Mystic specifically.
Outside of St. Augustine FLA, & a small part of downtown Pensacola, most of Florida lacks the historic treasures found in Connecticut. If a home was built in the late 1800's here, its considered ancient.
Those old buildings bring in tourist dollars, and help educate young people about how buildings were constructed long ago. Plus, most of them are so much more decorative, & colorful, than what we have today. They are just plain cool to look at.
I'm for saving as many as possible, and moving them if they simply can't stay where they are.
I'm spending a lot of money to visit your area, & part of it is for the historical significance...Mystic specifically.
Outside of St. Augustine FLA, & a small part of downtown Pensacola, most of Florida lacks the historic treasures found in Connecticut. If a home was built in the late 1800's here, its considered ancient.
Those old buildings bring in tourist dollars, and help educate young people about how buildings were constructed long ago. Plus, most of them are so much more decorative, & colorful, than what we have today. They are just plain cool to look at.
I'm for saving as many as possible, and moving them if they simply can't stay where they are.
Funny! I saw you on the FL thread earlier and just DMEd you about travelling to CT since we talked about it earlier.
Anyway.. I was about to comment on FL/ the rest of the country. I think it's so often lost on us (CT residents) just how much more history we have than the rest of the country... it's a real asset of the state that can't really be monetarily valued. Moreover it's slowly growing in value as it grows older and fewer historical structures remain.
Funny! I saw you on the FL thread earlier and just DMEd you about travelling to CT since we talked about it earlier.
Anyway.. I was about to comment on FL/ the rest of the country. I think it's so often lost on us (CT residents) just how much more history we have than the rest of the country... it's a real asset of the state that can't really be monetarily valued. Moreover it's slowly growing in value as it grows older and fewer historical structures remain.
Perhaps, some (mostly developers I'll bet) in your state take the historical structures for granted...I'll find out soon enough. I purposely chose a few B&B's for my stay there that are altered historical buildings, just to see the portions they kept original, & some of the old woodwork, and fixtures.
Perhaps, some (mostly developers I'll bet) in your state take the historical structures for granted...I'll find out soon enough. I purposely chose a few B&B's for my stay there that are altered historical buildings, just to see the portions they kept original, & some of the old woodwork, and fixtures.
It's not even just the structures but also the general asthetic of the area. (For example converting previously "vacant" or "empty seeming" fields to single family housing).
In my town for example there used to be massive onion farms to the point where we were "the onion capital of the world." Even though there's 65K people here now I think it's important to remember our rural past and each every remaining field plays into that
It's unfortunate that so much of the character and charm for which CT is known is being destroyed by hideous modern architecture. This is the only country in the developed world where such a thing is known as "progress" and it's really pathetic, especially when the modern replacement are pretentious and ugly. In my part of the state, you see a couple of teardowns with inferior replacements in their place, but by and large, people are happy to spend the money to restore an older, historic property to their former glory. In the end, it pays off, both financially and aesthetically. I wish more people across this state and elsewhere would wake up and follow suit.
It's unfortunate that so much of the character and charm for which CT is known is being destroyed by hideous modern architecture. This is the only country in the developed world where such a thing is known as "progress" and it's really pathetic, especially when the modern replacement are pretentious and ugly. In my part of the state, you see a couple of teardowns with inferior replacements in their place, but by and large, people are happy to spend the money to restore an older, historic property to their former glory. In the end, it pays off, both financially and aesthetically. I wish more people across this state and elsewhere would wake up and follow suit.
Agreed. It’s also an issue in cities. While I’m happy New Haven has so much new construction, some of it is that cheap generic new construction look that will not age well. The Audubon project is one that nicely blends into the area. New Haven is one of the richest examples of architecture in the state, so there’s a higher standard to uphold. In Stamford there’s really not much precedence downtown.
At least it’s not as bad as some of the projects down south. I was just in Nashville and the new construction there is painfully generic.
Agreed. It’s also an issue in cities. While I’m happy New Haven has so much new construction, some of it is that cheap generic new construction look that will not age well. The Audubon project is one that nicely blends into the area. New Haven is one of the richest examples of architecture in the state, so there’s a higher standard to uphold. In Stamford there’s really not much precedence downtown.
At least it’s not as bad as some of the projects down south. I was just in Nashville and the new construction there is painfully generic.
Agree 1,000% ! Think about it: so much of what makes a city unique is its architecture. Obviously there's much more to a city than the "look" of it, but it says so much about it. It's no coincidence that Manhattan's wealthiest and most desirable neighborhoods include Greenwich Village and SoHo, both of which would have been destroyed if Robert Moses' LOMEX got built, until the Lindsay administration (thankfully) killed this highway proposal. Almost immediately afterwards, these neighborhoods were granted landmark status, so they can never be torn down, and their history, character and charm are still fully intact. This is a model for other cities and neighborhoods to follow.
This made me so sad. The New Hartford House has stood at the center of New Hartford for more than 120 years. Such a beautiful building. Reports this morning showed the building completely gone in a pile of rubble. So sad. Jay
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.
Jay
