Preservation, I believe, has more of a social connection to buildings rather than natural places within societies outlook. In my eyes, it seems to be more important to maintain parks and continue to build new public spaces that are outdoors. Especially living within the city, there is more of a focus to continue to build, which is important in order to keep up with the growing population as well as the need for certain resources. Though, natural land continues to diminish. Lake Park is a great example of a public space that involves the community and provides a break from the metropolitan area.
Lake Park has many things that are open for the public. Recreationally speaking, the fields for children’s sports stand out the most, but there is also an ice skating rink in the winter as well as bird watching groups, as well as the North Point Lighthouse that is open for tours. Because of the size of the park it is vital for these programs to stay alive. Preserving land seems to be more difficult than buildings in a way that buildings don’t usually have to be used for communal activities, and more often are used as places of business. As long as a preserved building is in use usually it is not seen as a poor choice in preservation. While if land is not in use, at least to me, it would look as if the resources where being wasted, as if something else could go on that land.
I think it helps that the park has a strong history to Milwaukee as well. The Native American burial grounds, even though most were destroyed, are a good reason to use that land in a more natural state. Although, it would not be my first choice to put a little league field right on top of them. The lighthouse as well as the missile detection shelter are also interesting landmarks that fall within the boundaries of the park. It seems to me that since all of the landmarks fell in such close proximity that it only made sense to preserve that land.
Historically speaking when compared to places like Mount Vernon, the park might not stand up against too well. Nothing along the lines of historically famous people affected the area, though there might be something to be said about the lighthouse keepers. I don’t necessarily believe that figureheads like George Washington need to be affiliated in order to preserve something. It doesn’t hurt to have that background, but Lake Park has so much rich history outside of fame that deems it important. The fact that it has thrived for so long, even through the renovations of the lakefront prove that it is an important part of the area. It is nice to have organizations that are so involved with the community and that use the park as a common ground to unify. Lake Park is unique in that there is no other area in Milwaukee that has this much activity that happens solely for the public’s benefit.
First of all great pictures! I agree to the importance of preserving natural places, especially in urban environments like Milwaukee. I think that other places in America could learn from Milwaukee, if I remember correctly Milwaukee has the largest park space per captia of any other major US city. Its interesting how you brought up all the surrounding buildings with in the park, primarily the missile tracking station. I wonder if there were any arguments to that building going up in a park, or if the fear of invasion during the cold war allowed for such buildings to be erected wherever thought best.
ReplyDeleteI never noticed how that since the park was preserved there were many other elements such as the lighthouse and indian mounds preserved as well. Since all three are placed in close proximity gives preservationists more to stand on compared to the elements fighting individuality. I do like the fact that anyone can use these parks. I don't like the fact that in some areas people have to pay for park passes. It's like telling the public, "hey sorry we made everything around you industrial and ugly but we r going to charge you to use a space that was made naturally."
ReplyDelete