We’re having a fight over preserving an old brewery in Rochester. Preservation is a hard sell in this town. Even though the downtown core is getting more popular, there are still a lot of empty buildings and a lack of development. So when the local brewery (Genesee Beer) offered to build a visitors’ center on their grounds in a fairly desolate downtown-adjacent neighborhood, there was a lot of enthusiasm., even though they wanted to tear down an old brewhouse built in 1898. It didn’t matter that they had been given a $9 million package by taxpayers when the current owners bought the brewery, or that they building was designated as being of historical value (and therefore subject to a special city ordinance limiting development). The owners argue that their visitors’ center would fail without the extra parking provided by tearing down the building, even though there’s plenty of room to park across the street.
That’s all in the way of background to one of the best pieces of preservation advocacy I’ve seen in a long time, on a local blog called Rochester Subway:
Over the past two weeks we’ve reviewed at some local eyesores …or rather, opportunities, nearly lost. Those include the Flatiron Building,Station 55, Hoyt-Potter House, Lehigh Valley Railroad Station (Dinosaur Bar-B-Que), Parazin Building, Partners Building, and the Powers Building.
If you click on those links, you’ll find a great set of before and after stories of buildings that could have been torn down but instead became local landmarks. If you’re involved in some preservation advocacy in your part of the world, it’s well worth a look, because these fights tend to be over the future of one building taken out of context of the history of the town. It’s much easier to argue that tearing down a busted-up old building would be a huge loss when people imagine the loss of other places that are important to their daily lives.
Also, too: This will be my last post for a week and a half, since I’ll be traveling for Easter.
DougJ, Head of Infidelity
As a fellow Rochesterian…great post.
Steve
As a Detroiter I know a little bit about urban decay and struggling downtowns. One thing you have to think about is what makes your downtown unique – why would people choose to live in that area, or why would people from the outlying areas choose to go downtown instead of doing the same thing locally? Downtown Detroit used to be an awesome shopping destination 40 or 50 years ago, but once the suburbs started featuring a huge mall every couple miles or so, there was no longer any reason for people to shop downtown.
It seems to me that if your downtown has a historical character, that adds a certain coolness that is going to draw people. If you give that up, downtown might remain a place for people to go and drink, but it’s not clear why people would choose that over their local Bennigan’s. In the long run, a downtown that is indistinguishable from the suburbs will not prosper.
I don’t want to fetishize historical buildings, and I’m sure there would be examples where the economic development would be worth the loss, but if the only purpose is to provide parking that could easily be located somewhere else it sounds like a very easy call. I think you absolutely have to be pro-development these days unless you want to live in a dead city, but there’s no reason to be silly about it.
Schlemizel
Here in the Twin Cities we have several great examples of this sort of thing. Minneapolis was very much a ‘tear it down & start again’ place so it is full of large glass ice cube trays today. The few old buildings left have finally become cherished but so much was lost. Saint Paul otoh didn’t have that much pressure & managed to preserve many more of its historic buildings. Its a much more interesting downtown (too bad they got sucked into making one of the major streets a hot mess of a pedestrian mall).
Corey
Given that “historic preservation” tends to overwhelmingly favor entrenched interests at the expense of everyone else, I’m surprised to see this up on the site.
daveNYC
I can understand tearing down old buildings to stick something new in their place, though in this case that is a spiffy building that would look great if it was restored and turned into a tasty beer garden restaurant thing. Tearing down old buildings in order to create an empty parking lot is just flat out stupid though. If the complaint is that drug dealers and prostitutes hang out there, I don’t see how replacing a run down building with parking lot that will be empty during prostitution and drug dealing business hours will be an improvement.
SpotWeld
Makes you wonder about the “could have been” regarding the original Penn Station in NYC
Satanicpanic
@Corey: How so?
daveNYC
When he says ‘entrenched’, I assume he just means that the buildings have a basement. Most of the time I hear about it, it’s because it’s holding up some mega-development by a Donald Trump type wanker.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
So the FP morning posts will be down to one per day.
Judas Escargot, Your Postmodern Neighbor
Just about the only upside to the housing crash was that developers stopped trying to condo-fy every old brick building they could find in Salem. (I don’t consider condo-fication with substandard materials to be ‘preservation’).
__
Corey’s not wrong, BTW. “Preservation” is a pretty shady business, at least in my neck of the woods.
arguingwithsignposts
As a non-resident of Rochester, I could give a shit less. But cool story, bro.
Steve
@Schlemizel: That’s funny, I was just walking around downtown St. Paul yesterday. I liked it. Reminded me of Des Moines, for some reason.
Ronnie P
I work within walking distance of the Flatiron Building and occasionally eat lunch at Edible’s or that other place (with the outdoor tables). I’m glad it is as it is. That being said, I don’t think every single old building has to stay forever.
My impression is that the Rochester area skews more toward “old charm” than a lot of places. This is probably more apparent in the canal villages suburbs than the city itself. Our swankiest suburb, Pittsford, has not so much revitalized old buildings as wonderfully decrepit ones. It’s great.
Corey
@Satanicpanic: At least here in DC, “preservation” is invoked when residents of rich neighborhoods don’t want apartment buildings around the corner. They’ll talk about “character of the neighborhood”, “access to light and air”, blah blah blah.
But there’s a reason those neighborhoods are rich, and it’s because they’re a) nice places to live and b) close to transit. And so, “preservation”, in practice, means limiting everyone else’s access to the good stuff that the current residents of the neighborhood enjoy.
Progressives tend to identify developers as the villains in this drama, but that’s (often) wrong; developers, particularly apartment builders, are usually the unlikely progressive agents in stories like these.
Satanicpanic
@Judas Escargot, Your Postmodern Neighbor: There’s a building in downtown San Diego where they literally just kept the facade. That was pretty pointless. But I lived in an older neighborhood and it was cool having local shops, and generally a more dynamic atmosphere. If you’re going to build a new development you’re going to sign a bunch of national tenants to 10-15 year deals before you even break ground. Local tenants generally don’t have the ability to sign a lease like that.
Roger Moore
@Corey:
[[Citation Needed]]
Litlebritdifrnt
I come from a very old historic town in England called Lancaster. Parts of the Castle go back to 1066. In the down town area there if you want to build something new you basically are required to build it INSIDE the shell of an existing structure. They did that when they built the new cinema, they tore down the inside of the old Cooperative department store and built the new cinema.
Back in the 70s they wanted to build a new Department of Social Services building right basically at the bottom of the hill on which the castle sits. They built the structure as needed and then faced the entire building with old stone so it blended in with the silhouette of the castle, right down to arrow slits in the multi-story parking deck.
Fun fact the Lancaster PA County Jail is a replica of Lancaster Castle.
http://www.hauntedhistory.net/castle.gif
http://www.co.lancaster.pa.us/lcprison/site/default.asp
geg6
Interesting stuff. And there are stories like this even in very small towns. Locally, there has been quite the uproar over an old mansion in the picturesque town of Sewickley:
http://sewickley.patch.com/articles/church-halts-demolition-plans-for-the-pink-house
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/ae/art-architecture/sewickleys-coyle-house-pink-elephant-or-a-diamond-in-the-rough-628148/
muddy
I like this old style photoblog
http://www.shorpy.com/
It’s interesting to look at the modern versions of the areas shown with google map,earth.
redshirt
This is a thorny subject, no doubt. But ultimately, we are on a good arc as a society. It was not so long ago we’d tear down any old building in the name of something new, whatever it is.
There was a beautiful old railroad station in Portland Maine that fell out of use, and was torn down and in its place is the strippiest of strip malls, a true blight and urban wasteland. To see the before and after pictures is heartbreaking.
LGRooney
I tend to think preservationists have some Frank Capra movie stuck on replay in their heads. “In my day, blah, blah, blah…” I’m all for tearing down the old and rebuilding but avoiding the persistence of Schlemizel’s ice cube trays and Trump towers.
There are definite advantages to preserving in that you can hold on to some of the uniqueness of an area, you might be able to save some money, you might be able to reduce waste, and you can avoid current trends that will fade into ugliness as history gets a hold of them.
However, if you want to revitalize culture, tear down and rebuild while encouraging reworkings of the agreed-to good parts of the past. Sprinklings of the current within the preponderance of the old (even if re-worked) can provide greater innovation, avoid monotony, and enable modern building/accessorizing techniques that can increase efficiencies, especially as relates to environmental quality and energy usage.
Refurbishing can often be a very expensive proposition meaning the returns on such efforts can be very wasteful in light of the fact that the new efficiencies are too often an afterthought, if a thought at all, in the process of historical accuracy.
As an example, I think most downtown areas need to have public gathering spots, call them plazas or town squares. Must they have gazebos, though, because that fits the historical image of what a town square is? Hell no. Put up cart stands for local vendors just getting started, shut out the cars, and establish privilege for local entrepreneurs (and NOT the franchise kind, BTW) around the square. In smaller communities, it is a fantastic way to build that community and provide for local innovation. And, you know what?, who cares if it “looks” like the good old days as long as it is a safe and interesting place to meet with friends and neighbors and colleagues?
I know the complaints of many towns that have tried this are simply that these areas attract too many tourists which scare away the locals but that should be nothing more than a screaming “Hello!” to leaders in other communities that these developments can work.
BGinCHI
Perhaps the saddest part of this is that it’s Genesee doing the tearing down.
Their beer tastes like piss.
Tom65
@SpotWeld: Yup. Penn Station is a cautionary tale for “urban renewal” proponents.
Woodrowfan
Shorter Corey: Who cares if we lose some of our history, we’re stickin it to da man! whoo hoo!
JGabriel
Nice story, but Genny Cream Ale is … well, to put it diplomatically: the brewery may be worth saving, but I’m not convinced about the brew.
.
Roger Moore
@Corey:
There’s an important difference between neighborhood preservation and building preservation. The type of preservation you’re talking about is generally regressive, as you point out. But discouraging people from tearing down perfectly good historic buildings, especially if those buildings had previously been identified as architecturally significant, is a completely different matter.
Woodrowfan
Genny Cream Ale used to be quite good, 30 years ago at least.,
BGinCHI
@Woodrowfan: It’s not good. If you’ve lived in Upstate NY, it’s famously not good. It’s the Old Style of the NE.
Steve
I’m baffled by the idea that being a liberal means you should always be in favor of sticking it to the “entrenched interests,” anywhere and everywhere, completely irrespective of the merits of a particular situation or issue. I always liked thinking that liberals are a little more nuanced than that – maybe not.
JGabriel
__
__
Litlebritdifrnt:
It’s not enough that drivers are always aiming for us pedestrians with their multi-ton metal vehicles, now their parking decks have arrow-slits?
Bastards.
.
Satanicpanic
@Corey: I can see that really being a problem in terms of residential neighborhoods, and zoning is a huge culprit as well. If you get the chance, check out your local zoning map and try to find Multi-family zoned areas- most of the time these areas are small and not in the best places. But new commercial development usually just signifies more fast food chains and Applebee’s.
JGabriel
__
__
Woodrowfan:
25-30 years ago is roughly the last time I tried it, and my memory says different.
.
geg6
Oh, and I forgot to say…
Have a great trip, mm!
geg6
@JGabriel:
That was back when my sister used to drink it all the time. Stuff was nasty then, as I remember it.
JGabriel
__
__
geg6:
__
Seconded.
.
Corey
@Roger Moore: The problem is – who, and what, defines architectural significance?
Again, sorry to limit this to DC, but it’s just about all I know. Right now, there is tremendous pressure on DC real estate prices, because a) lots of people want to live here and b) we have artificially-imposed limits on housing (height limit)
A is a good thing, probably the best thing. But developers have been trying to do end-runs around B by identifying and replacing older buildings, usually with more units in the new ones. So now, “neighborhood preservationists” are going around demanding historic designations for mid-century modernist disasters – something that DC is full of.
The buildings I linked to above were designed by Saarinen/Corbusier proteges, which – along with a few prominent former residents – is the main plank in their application for historic status. There’s no doubt they’ll get it, and valuable real estate that could be put to better/more urban-friendly use will not.
JGabriel
@geg6: It must be an acquired taste, like bitter regret and masochism.
.
Woodrowfan
@JGabriel:
Maybe it just seemed good compared to Falls City and Black Label! :)
Origuy
@Litlebritdifrnt: I was in Lancaster last summer. Great little place, I wish I’d had more time to spend there. I did the castle tour, saw the historic courtroom and the cells of the old prison.
Corey
@Steve: The point is that preservation efforts, particularly in growing cities, basically have the effect of limiting access to public goods. That’s what I identify as illiberal, not “sticking it to the man” per se.
JGabriel
__
__
Corey:
Now, now, no need to bring Nixon and Reagan into this.
.
JGabriel
@Woodrowfan:
Ha! Not familiar with Falls City, but I can see how Genny Cream might seem like a step up from Black Label. Genny Cream had body and flavor, terrible but strong, IIRC, compared to the weak piss that is Black Label.
.
Litlebritdifrnt
@Origuy:
So glad you enjoyed it. I love my home town. I spent New Year’s Eve 1999/2000 at the castle, there was dancing in the keep, the buffet was laid out in the drop room and we watched the lighting of the fire and the fireworks off the parapet. It was magical.
geg6
Completely OT, but I found this hilarious. One of the DJ’s on the local rock station’s morning show recorded his little girl going off on Mike Milbury’s slams against Sidney Crosby and the Penguins on Philly radio the other day:
http://www.dve.com/player/?mid=21967455
Maude
@JGabriel:
When you cross a street here in town, you pray it’s a Beemer that hits you.
scav
So, was the Green Death nomenclature general or a product of the people that introduced me to the brew as a local landmark?
Mino
Reminds me of the slickness that local developers felt safe in using. Historic downtown cigar factory bldg. Developer needs land. City says no. Suddenly bldg is rubble. Oops, we made a boo-boo. Paid small fine and went ahead with their project.
Steve
@Corey: I’m not sure if Rochester is what I’d call a growing city. Western New York has been in a bad way economically for quite some time.
If we were talking about tearing down a building to make room for housing in a downtown that doesn’t have enough of it, I’d consider that a different issue.
GregB
It would behoove towns cities with large unoccupied old buildings to check out what Manchester NH did with some of the largest empty mill buildings in the world.
In the 70’s Manchester was a dead mill town, now most of those grand buildings have been retro-fitted and re-purposed into colleges, studios, restaurants, museums and the such.
Those old buildings with last for hundreds, if not thousands of years.
Old Dan and Little Ann
I read the old Brewery is quite dilapidated inside and needs a fair chunk of change to fix. I don’t know why any person would risk money on it when most High Falls joints have poor track records. I wish it could be different but I am not optimistic.
PurpleGirl
NYC lost the original Penn Station. Imagine if we’d also lost Grand Central Terminal… I don’t remember the fight over the demolition of Penn Station and very little of the fight over Grand Central but I’m so glad we got to keep Grand Central. It’s a beautiful building and it has seen changes in use of the internal space. I like the food court in the lower level but I miss all the seating that used to be in street level waiting rooms.
I like it when a new use can be found for historic, or even just nice, old buildings. When I used to take the train to Peekskill, I’d look at all the old industrial buildings along the Hudson that were falling into ruin and wish they could be re-used. They were beautiful and they were once useful. It spoke to the spirit of the companies and the men who worked in the buildings that they saw a future in those places.
PurpleGirl
In Alexandria (VA) there is an arts center in an old torpedo factory. (Yes, it’s called The Torpedo Factory Arts Center.) I found it by accident when visiting Alexandria for a friend’s wedding. It is a good preservation/restoration of an old building and (IIRC) it anchors an area in Alexandria with other craft/art stores. Preservation and development at the same time.
At one time, there was a fight over whether to tear down and move or restore the Westchester County Center in White Plains. As the old center of White Plains was revitalized, they renovated and upgraded the County Center. It’s nice older building and one I like. On occasion I’ve gone there for trade shows by train to White Plains. If they’d have moved it to a place only reachable by car, it would be different.
I think we need people with the vision to see how development can work in older locations to strengthen all our communities.
scav
Oh, and I’ve clearly missed the charming part of Pittsford on my brief trips, so if someone could provide a cross-street reference, I’ll search it out on my next fly-through. All that comes to mind is extremely large and very full parking lots and streets indistinguishable in size from the freeways. I’d very much appreciate the alternative.
Roger Moore
@Corey:
DC definitely has some unique problems, both an abundance of buildings that potentially can be designated historic, bad zoning, and a uniquely undemocratic local government structure. My suspicion is that the problems lie more with the Federal government deciding that the city should be severely restricted to avoid overshadowing the monuments and to hell with the peons who actually live there, and less with the attempt to preserve the occasional historic building.
Betsy
Tearing down a building to put parking is a HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE idea. I’m a city planner with 18 years of experience and I specialize in downtowns and older areas.
If you put dedicated parking next to the visitor center, guess what — the visitors will arrive and leave in their cars. You want to have shared parking down the block a ways so that they will walk past the other things (stores, buidlings, apts, etc) that you are trying to revitalize. You don’t want a drive-up effect downtown.
Never, ever, ever never put single-use dedicated parking lots downtown. Always, always, always, share the parking, share the parking, share the parking. Use an existing deck (I bet downtown Rochester is chock-full of parking decks that are mostly underutilized — every major downtown is), use existing lots, use lots that are empty during certain hours, share parking and never ever put single-use dedicated parking next to the building that it serves, or none of those visitors will patronize the rest of the stuff in the downtown.
You want your Visitors Center to contribute foot traffic (pedestrians) to downtown. It needs to be like the Red Sox or SF Giants ballfields — neither have any parking, and the visitors that come and go are spending, spending, spending in the surrounding blocks.
This is so incredibly elementary. Sad that the Rochester planners don’t get it, but that is very typical, I’m afraid.
Betsy
@Corey: Corey, could you clarify what public goods are being limited and how is the access being limited?
pseudonymous in nc
@Roger Moore: Exactly.
Corey, you’re comparing apples and oranges here, because DC is idiosyncratic in its governance and the status of its architecture. When we’re talking about industrial/manufacturing cities like Rochester, the idea of preserving the human-scale architecture of the urban core as opposed to building malls or office blocks isn’t upscale NIMBYism; it’s done in the context of other cities that have had their downtowns systematically hollowed out.
dan
You had me at “brewery”.
Betsy
Preservation economist Donovan Rypkema asks “Why invest money to tear down and reconstruct what’s already there? Historic buildings by and large have water lines, gutters, and streets already in place. Older ones, designed before cars were the dominant mode of transportation, instill surroundings with strong pedestrian orientations. If our future is aimed at reducing our reliance on automobiles, using buildings planned for human access is the smart place to start.”
Rypkema has argued that
“Razing historic buildings results in a triple hit on scarce resources.
“First, we are throwing away thousands of dollars of embodied energy.
“Second, we are replacing it with materials vastly more consumptive of energy. What are most historic houses built from? Brick, plaster, concrete and timber. What are among the least energy consumptive of materials? Brick, plaster, concrete and timber. What are major components of new buildings? Plastic, steel, vinyl and aluminum. What are among the most energy consumptive of materials? Plastic, steel, vinyl and aluminum.
“Third, recurring embodied energy savings increase dramatically as a building life stretches over fifty years.”
Commenting at Balloon Juice since 1937
I’ve been following the Rochester Subway posts for the last couple of weeks. Its very educational and shows that there is serious argument to made for historical preservation. I never knew the history of the current Dinosaur BBQ building before.
Corey
@Roger Moore: “Preservationists” applaud, and support the height limit (also, keep in mind, the Congresscritters who support the limit and their senior staffs are often residents of those selfsame rich neighborhoods with nice amenities). It’s not simply something imposed upon an unwilling population; in fact, the wealthy folks support it.
Although I don’t doubt that the circumstances are different, that’s how preservation plays out here and in a lot of big cities. I don’t know enough about the Rochester situation to really compare.
PurpleGirl
Betsy — I remember reading years ago that part of the reason Detroit ended up being destroyed was that when GM put up the “new” headquarters it had drive in parking and walled the whole site off from street-level foot traffic. As you said, one of the things you want in a downtown or commercial/business district is street-level foot traffic.
There are a couple of buildings in NYC where they put in recessed plazas that just haven’t worked very well (GM Building, Time-Life Building). It has taken years and changing retail users before the GM space at least has become something nice.
Corey
@Betsy:
Just a few:
1) Access to transit. Allowing greater density in neighborhoods closer to Metro stops/high frequency bus lines means more people can live near those things. That is good for traffic, pollution etc. etc.
2) Access to quality schools. Allowing greater density in neighborhoods with better schools would allow more people to send their kids to better schools. Benefits self-explanatory.
3) This is pretty broad, but access to urban life. Clearly, higher per-square-foot prices in the center of large cities indicates there’s demand to live in the city – demand that is limited by some idiosyncratic factors like DC’s height limit, but that is limited in other cities by historic preservation, etc.
Question Management
Quite frankly, you have to question the decision making abilities of any management group that continues to brew Genny Cream Ale…
As a student at the UofR (it was cheaper waaay back then and I was a scholarship student) I drank plenty of Cream Ale. I was broke, and it was cheap. 25 years later I grabbed a 6-pack just for old time’s sake. I figure it will be another 25 years before I make that mistake again. At least I stopped at 2 beers – didn’t have enough to bring on the Creamer Screamers.
Schlemizel
@Steve:
The same lack of economic growth that allows for preservation.
Mpls is more vibrant but STP is a more enjoyable place. Wish they could combine the two. Both have a problem that there is no “center”, no place from which the city organically flows, but they both have their personalities.
Judas Escargot, Your Postmodern Neighbor
@GregB:
This.
__
My commute takes me through Lynn, Massachusetts. Another old New England mill city with (shall we say) not the best reputation, and a lot of financial problems. But as you drive through certain neighborhoods, you realize that you’re driving past these old, potentially gorgeous brick buildings that were built to last for centuries.
__
Does anyone with the means and connections bother to develop them? No, of course not. Much better for all concerned to leave these buildings in the hands of undertaxed rent-farmers who barely maintain them.
Nylund
In my mind, the “Distillery District” in Toronto is a pretty decent example of how to repurpose old buildings into a place where people will enjoy going.
brendancalling
@Question Management:
Genesee Cream Ale is a hell of a lot better tasting than Budweiser or any of the other cheapo brands.
I’d love to open shop in the old Genesee brewhouse, especially if they left the equipment.
Steve
@PurpleGirl: GM’s “new” headquarters is a skyscraper in Downtown Detroit that was there for about 20 years, constantly bleeding tenants, before GM finally moved in. Whatever GM may have done to the place when they took possession, it isn’t what killed Detroit since downtown was dead long before that.
Before that, GM was at its previous headquarters for like 70 years, and it’s nowhere near downtown, so I don’t think your source could have been referring to that location.
It’s hard for me to see the new GM headquarters as anything but a boon for downtown Detroit. I mean, you bring thousands of workers downtown who weren’t there before and they surely need to eat and consume somewhere. It’s not like the previous status quo was working out great for anyone.
Ronnie P
Pretty much anywhere near the Canal. It’s a canal village, after all.
RochesterSubway.com
Thanks for the good words Mistermix. Preservation is a tough sell in any town certainly. A good friend once put it like this:
The percentage of people who think some old place isn’t worth saving = 90%
The percentage of people who believe saving it was a mistake afterwords = 0%
The remaining 10% live in the world of the possible. The rest just need to see it first. It wouldn’t be a stable world otherwise.
EIGRP
@Woodrowfan: 30 years ago was when Kodak was dumping all its chemical waste in the Genesee River. Correlation == causation? Sure!
@Ronnie P: Except for the god-awful looking library in Pittsford. I didn’t vote for that monstrosity.
It’s not just Genny that comes out of Rochester… Genesee Brewing also makes Dundee Ale and Lagers, Seagrams Escape, Rock Wall, and they are contracted to make many other beverages for the WNY market.
@scav: I like the vibe of the village of Fairport even though I live in Pittsford.
Anyway, I liked the link to the Rochester Subway blog. I didn’t know some of those buildings by name – it’s hard to know what is historic when they are maintained/used.
Eric
wobbly
Utter nonsense! As a native Rochesterian who regularly walks the High Falls area, and have been following the local news, I can aver that none of these “preservationists” ever heard of (or saw) that old brew house building until Genesee Beer announced its plans to build on the site.
The building is an utter wreck and blocks what might be great views of the river. If its antique architectural details fascinate people, let them enjoin Genesee to demolish it piece by piece. Will any one of them show up with the money to purchase these “precious” pieces of our past?
I think not!
G-d, I live very near Monroe and Goodman Street in the City and the construction of a a bigger and better Rite-Aid was held up for years over “concerns” about the allegedly “priceless” Monroe Theater building (which was actually a porn house at the time). I think the upshot was that Rite-Aid got its permission to build provided they preserved
the facade 0f the Monroe Theater.
Which they did. As someone who regularly has to wait in the dark and cold at Monroe and Goodman for an RTS bus to take me to my pitiful factory job, the new Rite-Aid has been a blessing. It lights up the entire intersection!
Still cold, but NOT dark! A great improvement, in my hunble opinion!
As to the “preservationists” who were so worried about the facade of the Monroe Theater-where are they now?
The thing is still standing but to what purpose?