I am a strong supporter of the Third Ward as an Historic district. I appreciate the different pockets that the city of Milwaukee has to offer, and The Third Ward is by far my favorite of them. The small warehouses turned bars, restaurants, and galleries add to the historic ambiance that make the area so unique. The buildings visual continuity creates a unique urban experience.
The design guidelines for the Third Ward are important for keeping the intent of preserving the areas charm and history. I see that this quote was used before, but I will use it again because it works perfectly. By analogy, a pearl has value. A string of graduated pearls, however, has value that far exceeds the value of all the individual pearls. (Murtagh) A singular building can have charm, but an entire area with similar charm is more impactful. Having an area such as the Third Ward designated as historic means the charm is preserved and is being looked after.
I believe that my favorite part of the guidelines set in place for the Third Ward is the preservation of ghost signs. I was always fascinated by the unique signage in the area and the charm that it ads to the community. I was curious as to why no one had really put forth the time and effort to rejuvenate the signage, but at the same time really appreciate the old world charm that they bring to the city. The restrictions set in place to limit building heights and architectural details help to maintain some sort of consistency which I find to be valuable in terms of aesthetic. It further ads to the pearl analogy in that the area has consistant charm.
Milwaukee's ability to maintain a somewhat consistant aesthetic through the design guidelines put in place keeps the unique urban experience alive and adds to the unique pocket of the city that is the Third Ward.
http://www.historicthirdward.org
Murtagh, William. Keeping Time, The History and Theory of Preservation in America. 3. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2005. 91-95. Print.
I agree that the ghosting advertisements add somewhat of a flavor to these buildings that have been changed so much. It almost grounds the the reality that this building was altered to be turned into something more useful. There is a certain aesthetic quality to the aged look that the signs have that I feel should always remain untouched. Since these places and things that building signs are displaying aren't existing anymore, for the most part, I also feel that there is an aspect of integrity that it give the current state of the city, as to its not lying about what the building it but instead it is moving forward.
ReplyDeleteI am curious to what downsides you see to the guidelines, or do you think there are none? Also, to note on the pearl analogy, is there such thing as too much charm for the third ward, is there possibly too much uniformity?