Observer on the Lower Town Historic District
Monday, October 31st, 2005The new Observer has a feature about the push to create a Lower Town historic district and the implications for historic preservationists if it were to suffer a defeat (one might say a historic defeat.) Lower Town has a rich history, supporters of the proposed district say. It was home to a number of abolitionists and “one of Ann Arbor’s first integrated neighborhoods.” What better way to honor that heritage than by keeping out affordable housing like the new private dorm that’s been suggested for the neighborhood? Of course, this being Ann Arbor, what’s “historically significant” is sometimes not as clear-cut. One house is cited for once being owned by a man who led “spiritual worship…in the nude.”
A poet whose work appears as one of the few less-than-positive pieces in the new anthology “Writing Ann Arbor” also touches on the preservation theme: “Trees and a few grand old/accidentally preserved houses/save it from total suburbanization,/give it the mildly authentic complexion/of secondhand furniture.” Uh, because suburbs never have grand old single-family houses.
We should probably point out that we grew up in an old home in a historic district, and our family has fought the town’s policy of permitting demolitions of older houses to make room for McMansions. So we grew up respecting the need for historic preservation. But when, say, some stylish new brick townhouses sprung up along the tracks in our town, it never occurred to us that this was part of the same problem that allowed that cookie-cutter monstrosity with the two-story foyer and stone address plate to be built a few blocks down. It’s our experience with historic districts in other places that makes the Ann Arbor approach so perplexing.