Robin Garr wrote:I think I covered it in my Doc Crow's review a couple of weeks ago. The "other" half of Whiskey Row, where you'll find Crow's and Bearno's and ... O'Shea's? ... makes it awfully hard to sustain the argument that older buildings aren't worth saving. Our historic urban streetscape gives our city its unique stamp. That's worth saving, even if it requires some expense. Letting some over-privileged yuppie tear them down for his short-term convenience makes no sense. I say bring on the preservation district.
Matthew D wrote:You better be ready to defend your opinion before the LHB Libertarian gang. If they don't like your argument, you are forced to read Ayn Rand.
Steve H wrote:Matthew D wrote:You better be ready to defend your opinion before the LHB Libertarian gang. If they don't like your argument, you are forced to read Ayn Rand.
Never read Ayn Rand. Another stereotype busted?
However, I think the owner of record of an property declared an historical landmark just be justly compensated, just like in normal imminent domain cases.
Matthew D wrote:Steve H wrote:Matthew D wrote:You better be ready to defend your opinion before the LHB Libertarian gang. If they don't like your argument, you are forced to read Ayn Rand.
Never read Ayn Rand. Another stereotype busted?
However, I think the owner of record of an property declared an historical landmark just be justly compensated, just like in normal imminent domain cases.
Forgot the emoticon. You must be the last great original, in a world where nothing is original.
Steve H wrote:Sometimes I use imoticons, sometimes I don't. I guess I wasn't feeling particularly emoticony when making this post. I can endeavor to sprinkle them more liberally (ha!) when responding to you, if you like.
I don't know how original I am, but I am an individual.
Matthew D wrote:Sorry. Meant that I forgot the emoticon.
Matthew D wrote:I had a good laugh at you calling yourself an individual. Not because I doubt you. Only that I would expect nothing different from a libertarian.
Cheers to you. Don't know if I will be back tomorrow for anymore, but today's been entertaining.
Matthew D wrote:Nah, I wasn't mad. My blood sugar numbers were wacked out today, so I was probably on edge. Once I got some distance from the computer, I lost some of my grumpiness.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests