Church plans to demolish beautiful 1850s mansion in Sewickley! (fit in, condos)

[Lobick]

My guess is that the church hoped to do this on the qt. Now that the Trib has jumped on this and there has to be a zoning hearing I would imagine that it will be considerably more difficult. I'm not of Sewickley and don't know how much clout that particular Presbyterian church has, but I'd guess it won't be enough to tear it down. The church won't want the bad PR.

I'd bet, in the end, the building gets designated historic, deep pockets in the community, church, and non-profit sector get together, the land is re-zoned and they can use some historic tax credits or something to help renovate the building and in addition maybe build another structure on the land to meet some of their needs.

Purely a guess but I doubt the interested parties in a place like Sewickley will throw up their hands and agree with "nothing anybody can do".

[BrianTH]

I suspect most people in Sewickley are well-aware their historic charm is a large part of why they have avoided the fate of many less fortunate river towns.

[kettlepot]

I support the Church. Why would anyone want to keep an ugly, old building around when we could all enjoy the sight of a beautiful, new parking lot!

Nothing makes the heart sing like the sight of an urban landscape filled with one parking lot after another, devoid of people, everyone safely and comfortably enclosed in his own inviolable personal space, separate from each other, each person an inert atom of humanity not interacting with the other.

Charm and character are over-rated. Asbestos, lead paint - there are plenty of hazards in these old buildings. The gothic cathedrals of Europe and the 19th century churches of America are death traps of LEADED glass. Raze them all!

Old buildings? Pshaw! We need an urban landscape of concrete, asphalt, and reflective glass, all sterilized for our protection.

Sterilize Sewickley! That's MY motto.

[gg]

Originally Posted by Lobick

I'm not of Sewickley and don't know how much clout that particular Presbyterian church has, but I'd guess it won't be enough to tear it down.

You would most likely be guessing wrong. No doubt a very wealthy church, like the one in the middle of FC. These churches are not hurting and are growing.

They want a safe youth center for the kids. Why do people not want them to have it? To save a building full of asbestos? Is that a good place for a youth center? Here is an idea. They own it and if they want to enhance the community with a youth center, why would anyone stop them? People are more important than buildings, you know. Where do you expect them to build the center for the kids? A mile away?

[BrianTH]

That home looks like an excellent place for a youth center that, among other things, would help teach our youth about local history and about the importance of sustainable development practices.

[Lobick]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

You would most likely be guessing wrong. No doubt a very wealthy church, like the one in the middle of FC. These churches are not hurting and are growing.

They want a safe youth center for the kids. Why do people not want them to have it? To save a building full of asbestos? Is that a good place for a youth center? Here is an idea. They own it and if they want to enhance the community with a youth center, why would anyone stop them? People are more important than buildings, you know. Where do you expect them to build the center for the kids? A mile away?

Well, we'll see.

(As an aside, in the vein of enlightenment and in hopes to avoid protracted debate, let's all recognise that this response is no doubt part of Curtis' continued sulking surrounding the demolition of the Civic Arena. He now plays the role of faux-zealot, advocating the demolition of all structures in the name of progress (see Strip District theads, this thread, Walmart etc.). It's all very clever.)

[airwave09]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

You would most likely be guessing wrong. No doubt a very wealthy church, like the one in the middle of FC. These churches are not hurting and are growing.

They want a safe youth center for the kids. Why do people not want them to have it? To save a building full of asbestos? Is that a good place for a youth center? Here is an idea. They own it and if they want to enhance the community with a youth center, why would anyone stop them? People are more important than buildings, you know. Where do you expect them to build the center for the kids? A mile away?

Yes, the Sewickley Academy has it's sports fields over a mile away and it's no issue. This is an example of when the community needs to stand up for a defenseless structure that has much historical value. This house predates the Civil War for crying out loud!

[gg]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

That home looks like an excellent place for a youth center that, among other things, would help teach our youth about local history and about the importance of sustainable development practices.

1. Have you been in the building?
2. Do you know the asbestos situation?
3. Do you know anything about this other than the building looks pretty from the outside and is old?

Seriously, everyone is jumping on a church because they want to build a youth center for the kids attending church there? It is a building, not set up for kids, it is set up to be a home. Goodness. One building, not some huge significant structure. Let the kids have their youth center.

[gg]

Originally Posted by airwave09

Yes, the Sewickley Academy has it's sports fields over a mile away and it's no issue. This is an example of when the community needs to stand up for a defenseless structure that has much historical value. This house predates the Civil War for crying out loud!

Um, a sports field? What if the Academy had a lot big enough to hold a sports field with a building on it from the 1800's? Do you think the Academy would tear it down to be able to walk next door to the sports field? Of course they would. A sports field is a huge footprint! A youth group is a very small footprint. Just common sense.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

1. Have you been in the building?

No.

2. Do you know the asbestos situation?

Only what was reported, but I am generally familiar with the likely asbestos problems in older residences.

3. Do you know anything about this other than the building looks pretty from the outside and is old?

Yes, I am also familiar with how that building contributes to the neighborhood in which it is located.

It is a building, not set up for kids, it is set up to be a home.

And apparently that area is zoned residential. Which means it is perfectly reasonable to ask them to make certain accommodations with respect to preserving the character of the neighborhood if they want a variance.

If they would prefer not to make such accommodations, they can choose instead to build their youth center in a place zoned for it and without any other relevant restrictions.