When this issue arose, there was a spirited e-mail dialogue among the board members of Develop New Albany. My personal opinion is that the money would be better spent elsewhere, because a closer examination of pleasant memories and nostalgia would reveal an attachment to operating family and its product, not the building itself. That's my view. Yours?
Emery's Ice Cream Shop: Demolition of old New Albany ice cream shop is frozen; Preservationists hope to move longtime New Albany fixture, by Harold J. Adams (Courier-Journal).
So Renn got a demolition permit from the city and started to tear apart the former ice cream shop early last month. He began with ripping off part of the roof one evening and then took a break.
That turned out to be a lucky break for the building -- maybe.
The next morning, an employee of the Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana was driving by and spotted the gaping hole in the roof and a Bobcat loader next to the building. She realized that a symbol of countless area memories was about to disappear.
10 comments:
The Dutch system has its own share of problems economically and they are battling very similar issues.
They do ration health care and they do see the need to make tax laws more beneficial to businesses to promote growth.
Their work force is declining in part because of paying people or discouraging people to not work.
The article below is a summary of the economic climate.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/4/39974144.pdf
To me that ship has sailed. The memories of Emery's ice cream have already been preserved in a nice little ice cream shop just off the square in Corydon.
It was short sighted of the people of New Albany to let it get away but lucky it didn't go too far.
Four guys can get up and play the Beatles guitars but it still won't be the Beatles.
sweet memories sure, but sort of "precious" to waste resources "saving" a little wood shack when we have historic register buildings crumbling everywhere.
I’m naturally averse to sending anything to a landfill that doesn’t really need to be there. If the building can be located to an appropriate location and can serve a new purpose, at a reasonable expense, then let’s move it. If you don’t want to dedicate resources to the effort, then don’t.
In my opinion there’s a bigger issue here. We (all of us) need to be proactive instead of reactive. This is particularly true for community activism and preservation.
Whoa. The skinny cat with the boxing gloves is dropping bombs today.
I dig it.
Really, what makes the building special & therefore worthy of preservation? Truthfully, it's a pretty unremarkable building, & some obviously regard it as little more than a "shack." Should similar efforts be made for the building that once housed the Jug when its time comes?
I agree with Ted, we need to look at the big picture. We need to be proactive like the owner of 550 Beharrell and tear down the final blight on one of the few nice streets in old N.A. Then we should use the material to make bird houses for Bicknell Park.
Attention all: We have a usage policy here. It appears in the right column of the main page. Unlike the city, we enforce this ordinance. Thank you.
It is simple. Comply with our policy or not. If yes, mail me personally. If not, I delete your comments. My sandbox, my rules.
Post a Comment