Which US City has done the worst job of preserving its historic architecture?

Charlotte...Atlanta?

How far back does one consider "historic"?

Detroit?

Detroit hasn't done the best job, but I wouldn't say it has done the worst job either. I'm sure there are quite a few sunbelt cities that completely bull-dozed their historic downtowns to make way for the current skylines.

From my experience - Atlanta, Charlotte, Dallas & San Diego.

Of course - most of these cities still do have historic sections of downtown, Atlanta with Fairlie Poplar & San Diego with the Gaslamp district.

Of course in other cities I noticed significant areas which had obviously been demolished, again a quasi-sunbelt city: Indianapolis.

Chicago has done some amazingly stupid stuff. We've wiped out whole neighborhoods. Multiple times.

historic buildings suck they are all run down except for mabe new york and detroit bull doze them to make way for new ones

i thought i had a good answer, and i was racking my brain about it, but i realized i was thinking about george costanza wearing babe ruth's uniform as a way to try and get fired, and steinbrenner liked the idea, saying "out with the old, in with the new." off topic but funny.

writing proper english sucks except mabye for when bad spellign and grammer signify an opinion is unintelligent get rid of english to make way for the language of intelligence: gibberish

most cities did some stupid stuff in the 1960s and 1970s. Miami bulldozed a thriving black middle class neighborhood Overtown to build a freeway, creating the cities worst ghetto in the process. One of the worst examples was the Roney Palace on South Beach. It was a beautiful 1920's art deco masterpeice until it was butchered in the 60's or 70's to make it more "modern" and add rooms and such. Now its an eyesore. Also the Everglades Hotel in Downtown Miami was also a beautiful art deco 1920's structure that was allowed to fall into disrepair through the years and was demolished last year to make way for twin 500-foot condo towers.

The Everglades Hotel in the 1920s:
http://www.library.miami.edu/archives/cards/ht05.jpg

The crumbling Everglades circa 2000 before it was mercifully imploded (notice the crown had already been long removed):
http://www.hotels-miami-discount.com/hotels/everglades-hotel-miami_files/010494A.jpg

I would have to say that would be Detoit.. and Chicago. They both had some of the best examples of Great Lakes architecture... but Chicago raised theirs to build new buildings, and Detroit straight up abandoned theirs and let them deteriorate into irreversable disrepair.

But Detroit has preserved a hell of a lot more than many other cities, and due to the economic stagnation of the city in the last 40 years, much has remained that would have probably been torn down to make way for newer buildings.

Sure Detroit is no San Francisco when it comes to preservation, but compared to cities like Houston and Atlanta, it's done a pretty good job of holding on to its historic architecture. Granted there are several things that city screwed up during the "urban renewal" era like Lafayette Park, south Corktown, Brush Park, etc.

^^ No offense to Detroit... but ANY great lakes city could give ANY sunbelt city a beating iwhen it comes to preservation.

Of course in other cities I noticed significant areas which had obviously been demolished, again a quasi-sunbelt city: Indianapolis.


I don't get this comment...

Is it because we have a growth rate over 15%? Is it because of our 1969 city-county merger? The city had 169,000 people in 1900! I don't get it.

Actually for sunbelt cities, Miami has done a great job considering its land issues and current condo boom. Los Angeles is very underrated also as far as preservation.

I don't get this comment...

Is it because we have a growth rate over 15%? Is it because of our 1969 city-county merger? The city had 169,000 people in 1900! I don't get it.

I admit it's based on personal view, but I think Indianapolis exhibits some qualities to a sunbelt city, as Denver does as well. Based on my last visit to downtown, I did find it beautiful, in particular the central monument & the historic structures surrounding, but I also experienced some intangible 'newness' or post-modernism regarding some other areas of Indianapolis, & in particular to the suburbs such as Fishers. But please, this is just a personal opinion, but based on comparing Cincinnatti or even Louisville I just had a different 'vibe' from a typical midwest city.

... don't quote me on that, I might change my opinion tomorrow.

Regarding historic loss, on the edge of downtown I found not only parking lots, but large collections of modern structures - museaums & sports facilities. So... I figure something historic was once there. When I compare cities that lost a greater deal of historic structures, I compare the cities which have areas that are completely new (typically a sunbelt city) & those that have managed to combine new structures within existing historic areas. That is what I think of NYC & Chicago - they didn't neccessarily demolish whole historic areas, but made room for newer structures by demolishing a single or a couple of historic buildings.

Wait, are we talking about entire cities or just the CBD's. If TheBrad is refering to the entire city of Indianapolis, I would agree with him on some parts (Northside is depressing, considering how dense it used to be).

EDIT: posted at the exact same time.

Here's what Indy's Northside was like in 1956:

http://www.geology.iupui.edu/research/GraphixLab/Data/EACI/aerialarchive/marion_56/aerials/05-10.jpg

1998
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?t=1&s=11&x=1432&y=11014&z=16&w=2

If you look at photos of most American cities around 1900, you will see that they are quite dense and built up in the central areas. If you look at photos of most of those same cities taken in 60-70's you'll see the same areas containing a mixture of new tall buildings and acres of surface parking lots. It has taken decades to infill those parking lots and it is still the predominant landscape in many American cities.

Minneapolis has completely annihilated entire historic sections of the city, notably the Gateway Area, and up and down Washington Ave. Most of the original core of buildings downtown are long gone, too.

Washington Ave. Before & After:
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/washingtonav/washmarqthen.jpg
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/washingtonav/washtoday/marqwashtoday.jpg

http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/washingtonav/wash562.jpg
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/washingtonav/washtoday/giants.jpg

http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/washingtonav/wash1949.jpg
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/washingtonav/washtoday/mainwashtoday.jpg

http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/parkbldg/20spost.jpg
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/washingtonav/templepost.jpg

Historic Buildings standing alone like this one in Minneapolis are not at all uncommon:
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/washingtonav/misc2.jpg

Bridge Square - Originally City Hall which burned down, Then Gateway Park, which was torn down, then the streets rerouted for no particular reason only to become a parking lot and nondescript apartment buildings:
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/bridgesquare/oldpost.jpg
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/parkbldg/nicdemo.jpg
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/parkbldg/postraze.jpg
All that exists of the once very prominent Gateway Park is the flagpole seen here:
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/parkbldg/bridgetoday/bldg2day.jpg

North side of Hennepin Ave. at Gateway Area then and now:
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/bridgesquare/200niclo.jpg
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/parkbldg/bridgetoday/brdsq2day4.jpg

http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/bridgesquare/1952.jpg
http://www.lileks.com/mpls/gateway/parkbldg/bridgetoday/brdsq2day3.jpg

It's tragic what has been done in Minneapolis. Blocks and blocks were destroyed on purpose. To think that when entire districts were razed, the developers were looking to the future. And that in this day in age, we're trying to recreate the past. Oh, the irony.

^^
Minneapolis lost some AWESOME stuff. :/

Louisville goes too far with its preservation these days. >_>
It's so hard to get ANTHING new up because preservationists want to save everything built prior to 1970. It's rather annoying.

And while I LOVE our castirons DT, I put the most blame on them for unhelpable gaping gaps in Louisville's skyline. >(

I would say places like Atlanta are big losers here, and the Boston types are the major winners.

I think NYC lost a bunch. I can't believe they demolished the Singer Building for a ugly black box tower.

^^
Minneapolis lost some AWESOME stuff. :/

Louisville goes too far with its preservation these days. >_>
It's so hard to get ANTHING new up because preservationists want to save everything built prior to 1970. It's rather annoying.

And while I LOVE our castirons DT, I put the most blame on them for unhelpable gaping gaps in Louisville's skyline. >(

I would say places like Atlanta are big losers here, and the Boston types are the major winners.


Put Louisvills also lost TONS of beauties to "urban renewal" especially a hoarde of historic mansions and midrise 10-20 story buildings. This site shows in sad and amazing detail what a grand city Louisville was. One of the inaugral National League Baseball teams, one of the 10 biggest cities, and now look what it is after the "bombings":

http://www.oldlouisville.com/Ruins/

wow... Louisville would be awesome if all those buildings were still here and in-tact...

Nice pictures from the Twin Cities. It is sad to say that these could be duplicated for many US cities. There is a nice book on Atlanta, called "Atlanta, then and now" which does this nicely. In 1900 the central city area was really very dense, with no holes in the streescape. Now we talk about "infill" - trying to put it back together.

^ There is also a nice website called Atlanta Time MAchine that shows before & after images based on historical imagery from GSU Library. Despite the lack of high rises in downtown, it was much more dense then than it is now.

The most striking thing about the Minneapolis pictures is how devoid of people the after pictures are. What a shame.

The most striking thing about the Minneapolis pictures is how devoid of people the after pictures are. What a shame.


Look at the Atlanta website suggested by the Brad - same thing

I admit it's based on personal view, but I think Indianapolis exhibits some qualities to a sunbelt city, as Denver does as well. Based on my last visit to downtown, I did find it beautiful, in particular the central monument & the historic structures surrounding, but I also experienced some intangible 'newness' or post-modernism regarding some other areas of Indianapolis, & in particular to the suburbs such as Fishers. But please, this is just a personal opinion, but based on comparing Cincinnatti or even Louisville I just had a different 'vibe' from a typical midwest city.

... don't quote me on that, I might change my opinion tomorrow.

Regarding historic loss, on the edge of downtown I found not only parking lots, but large collections of modern structures - museaums & sports facilities. So... I figure something historic was once there. When I compare cities that lost a greater deal of historic structures, I compare the cities which have areas that are completely new (typically a sunbelt city) & those that have managed to combine new structures within existing historic areas. That is what I think of NYC & Chicago - they didn't neccessarily demolish whole historic areas, but made room for newer structures by demolishing a single or a couple of historic buildings.


That's fair...I'll take that.

Indy's Historic Preservation Commission has really stepped to the plate in the past 15 years. A Lot was lost, so the IHPC Staff has had to basically focus on new construction. What is sad, though, is that only one small part of the CBD is goverened by the IHPC (the Wholesale District) while the rest has NO architectural standards that are required. It is sad really and looks to not change anytime soon.

NOW, there are plenty of residential areas inside the downtown loop that have IHPC protection, but that is it.

WOW, great pics of Louisville. It's a shame. A lot of midwest (I am gouping L'ville in here) cities decided to tear down some gems to make way for parking lots in the 1960's. First, rip out entire neighborhoods for the freeways, then tear down beautiful strucutres for parking lots. Sounds like the automobile really caused some damage.

Las Vegas

this is tough, but I'm gonna say that some cities had to raze some of the buildings in order to grow. Some cities expected to grow so they modernized, maybe a little too much...and now it just looks bad.

Detroit, most of the biggest grandest tallest towers still stand, and the city has hope...it retains most of it's classic architecture.

Chicago, regardless if the city has razed buildings it shouldn't have...the city still looks great.

Boston, this is my pick...I think Boston has done some amazingly dumb things as far as Urban Renewal.


BOSTON!

Boston, this is my pick...I think Boston has done some amazingly dumb things as far as Urban Renewal.


BOSTON!

You're joking right? Boston is the last city that needs to be mentioned in this thread.

this is tough, but I'm gonna say that some cities had to raze some of the buildings in order to grow. Some cities expected to grow so they modernized, maybe a little too much...and now it just looks bad.

Detroit, most of the biggest grandest tallest towers still stand, and the city has hope...it retains most of it's classic architecture.

Chicago, regardless if the city has razed buildings it shouldn't have...the city still looks great.

Boston, this is my pick...I think Boston has done some amazingly dumb things as far as Urban Renewal.


BOSTON!
I disagree. The Urban Renewal only knocked out the North End and it is mainly rowhouses. Boston has been able to preserve so many old buildings. Though we recently lost 1 theater, we were able to restore 4 old ones. We still have the state house and the old capitol building. There is also the Paul Revere house and many other buildings that, though it was not destroyed, it was rebuilt. Here are some that have been redesign.

https://wfs.bc.edu/bowesst/ab/cathedral.jpg.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/Joe_Schmoe/Bryant/Transcript.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/Joe_Schmoe/Bryant/CityHall2.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/Joe_Schmoe/Bryant/State.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/Joe_Schmoe/Bryant/State2.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/Joe_Schmoe/Bryant/Mercantile1.jpg

http://www.adventurers.it/images/boston%20b&w/Opera-House-web.jpg
Boston def. did one of the best job preserving old building compared to most major cities.

Here is a photo thread I found on SSP that shows how much urban renewal that has taken place in the city of Boston.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?threadid=71894&

not much

Detroit, Atlanta, and Charlotte.

I think LA does too in a sense. Alot of old buildings and lots are either being remade into condo communities or lofts.

^ LA knocked down almost all their pre-war structures in downtown and neighborhoods near downtown.

Look at Norfolk, where mid-century "Urban Renewal" began!

Area immediately north of CBD in 1931:
http://www.npl.lib.va.us/images/1998/mc4.gif

and in 1968:
http://www.npl.lib.va.us/images/1998/mc12.jpg

These photos are courtesy of Norfolk Public Libraries and were posted in the Norfolk History thread on UrbanPlanet.


I will give Norfolk credit for preserving old buildings along Granby Street and western portions of their downtown.

Old Stuff in Norfolk:


North and Eastern portions, however, were simply leveled during the 1950s. Norfolk was the first city to receive Federal $ to redevelop under the Federal Housing Act of 1949. So this is where "Urban Renewal" began.

Wow, that before and after of Norfolk is pretty sad. What a shame.

Unfortunately, I think a few cities were only an exception to the rule back then, and a lot of cities destroyed some great history, and now they're regretting it.

Las Vegas


What historic architecture, those butt ugly old ass casinos?

^ LA knocked down almost all their pre-war structures in downtown and neighborhoods near downtown.

Yep, they are all gone all thats left are strip malls, LA sucks.

http://kansascity.cjb.net/LAWalkers.JPG

Yep, they are all gone all thats left are strip malls, LA sucks.

Oh please. I hope you are not that naive. LA still has a lot left in the historic district along Broadway, but it still use to be denser. And have you been directly outside of LA? The gritty low tract stucco bungalows and apartment buildings were not always there. Go to the Westlake district. Quite a culture shock, but a lot has been removed.

I love when people use photos of streets against me that I've not only been in, but took photos of myself, i.e.

http://www.streetsandsoul.com/la07.jpg

Walk a few blocks from Broadway in any direction.



I remember once an Atlanta forumer actually used one of MY photos against me in a skyline thread. LOL!

but anyways, is it time for a re-education

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?threadid=87122

historic buildings suck they are all run down except for mabe new york and detroit bull doze them to make way for new ones

apparently minneapolis...

there are so many things to love about mpls, but, historic architecture seems sparse...heck, denver probably has done a better job, how sad...

That pic of Norfolk is sad! Those buildings were great! Why did they think it would be a good idea to tear them down? Too many cities are still doing this too!

Cwilson, do you want the short answer or the long answer?
Short Answer: It was in the name of urban revitalization.
Long Answer: A large part of it involved racially-transitioning neighborhoods and preservation of a de facto school segregation to replace the crumbling de jure school segregation (read Forrest White's "School Desegregation and Urban Renewal in Norfolk 1950-1959").

There are some old things left in Norfolk:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v714/vdogg/cranes1.jpg
http://www.beyonddc.com/images/norfolk/downtown/granbyst04.jpg