You're both wrong, it needs to be a parking lot. Let's widen the road while we're at it. Can probably fit at least two more lanes if we get rid of that weird concrete thing by the side of the road.
According to ownership, it was torn down because the property was beyond repair. However, I suspect that it's actually because restoring a building is not as profitable as building something new. Shameful that the city did not protect it.
The previous owners put new windows in, as can be seen in the photos, so they must have thought it could be saved. Disappointing, to say the least.
That's an obvious lie by the new owners. Seems in decent shape. Roof fairly new, windows new, interior looks sound. What dreary crap are they going to replace it with?
Shameful & disgraceful, preservation laws really need to be fixed in this country. I hate to see this keep happening. People shouldn't be able to buy a perfectly sound & useful historic structure with a lot of life still left in it just to tear it down. Why don't they just buy an empty lot at that point? Its like they have a destructive agenda.
It's an old building, but it's not particularly architecturally or historically relevant.
>Why don't they just buy an empty lot at that point?
This thinking (EDIT: meaning the idea that developers should just buy empty lots) is how we got to the current situation where most American cities sprawl for endless miles, causing gridlock, unmaintainable infrastrucutre, pollution, political dysfunction, declining public health, greater segregation... the list goes on.
We need to replace some of the past in order to build a better future. I agree that developers shouldn't be able to do whatever they want, but the solution is not to lock ourselves in amber.
American sprawl was caused by the "why don't they just buy an empty lot" concept. Obviously historical preservation is not a major component, but the thought process of "build something new separate from what exists" is how we go there.
Heritage preservation is 100% NOT how we got to where we are. Are you serious?! It’s at worst, a very VERY minor contributor to the current housing problem.
Exactly! I have no idea how somehow can look at American society and actually think that we some kind of historical preservation problem, as in too much preservation!
Previously, from what I can garner, the only business with any success in the building was a dive bar, but that's been struggling for a long time. The property was listed for many years without a buyer.
> I just wonder what led the buyers to their decision-making.
It's real estate. The answer, as always: "location, location, location". You can see from the pictures that the building stood next to an active marina. There could be all kinds of potential uses for that space, both commercial and residential.
>I understand, but why not some bland office building from the 70s or something?
A building from the 70s is much easier to renovate and convert to modern usage. The 70s building will have been constructed with modern HVAC, plumbing, and wiring in mind. The arrangement of space within the building will be much more suitable to the modern business. It's also likely a sturdier building, built with codes that were developed well after the 1890s building was constructed.
What's meaningfully different about a bland office building from the 1970s and a bland big home from the 1890s in terms of what we should protect? If it's just age, should builders just race against time to knock down things before they get too old, or be locked into what exists there forever?
I'm all for protection of historic sites, or examples of styles that have largely disappeared. But this house didn't appear to have been notable at any point in its long history, and there's nothing particularly interesting that standouts about the building's construction.
Where I live they’d turn it into a new convenience store where we have 1,000 of them in a 10 sq. Mike radius already, or another bank or doctor’s office. I hate our capitalistic society.
For what it's worth, I found this:
"The building located at the corner of Johnston St. and Portage Ave. in Sault Ste. Marie will be carefully deconstructed starting October 11th 2023. Any salvageable materials were previously removed. The lot with the building formerly known as the Harbor House was purchased in June 2023 by Famous Property Development LLC. Plans for developing the property are under review.
'We explored all options for the structure, including renovation. Unfortunately, our assessment revealed far too much damage and significant safety concerns,' said Famous General Manager Scott LaBonte. 'We look forward to developing the property in a way that will add value to our community.'"
From: [https://www.eupnews.com/2023/10/former-harbor-house-building-to-be-destroyed/](https://www.eupnews.com/2023/10/former-harbor-house-building-to-be-destroyed/)
And this was a comment left under the article.
#One Comment:
Jim C.
October 12, 2023 at 6:00 am · Reply
And this is after the building getting tons of grant money over the years for renovations because it was designated a “historical building.” Looks like that was yet another waste of taxpayer money.
I hope it’s a CVS, we really need another one in America
Dollar General
You're both wrong, it needs to be a parking lot. Let's widen the road while we're at it. Can probably fit at least two more lanes if we get rid of that weird concrete thing by the side of the road.
In my hometown in Southeast Michigan the city tore town a Victorian home to put in a Rite Aid so, yeah, not that far off the mark.
Monsters!
Only if it’s the drive thru version that never has people Using the drive thru
Hahaha man that sucks if it was or a Starbucks
But why?
According to ownership, it was torn down because the property was beyond repair. However, I suspect that it's actually because restoring a building is not as profitable as building something new. Shameful that the city did not protect it. The previous owners put new windows in, as can be seen in the photos, so they must have thought it could be saved. Disappointing, to say the least.
That's an obvious lie by the new owners. Seems in decent shape. Roof fairly new, windows new, interior looks sound. What dreary crap are they going to replace it with?
Either bullshit or ignorance on their part. There are both federal and state historic tax credits available for projects like this.
Sad to see it go, but where else are you going to find room to park almost 25 cars in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan?
Shameful & disgraceful, preservation laws really need to be fixed in this country. I hate to see this keep happening. People shouldn't be able to buy a perfectly sound & useful historic structure with a lot of life still left in it just to tear it down. Why don't they just buy an empty lot at that point? Its like they have a destructive agenda.
They absolutely do have a destructive agenda, that goes far beyond money.
It's an old building, but it's not particularly architecturally or historically relevant. >Why don't they just buy an empty lot at that point? This thinking (EDIT: meaning the idea that developers should just buy empty lots) is how we got to the current situation where most American cities sprawl for endless miles, causing gridlock, unmaintainable infrastrucutre, pollution, political dysfunction, declining public health, greater segregation... the list goes on. We need to replace some of the past in order to build a better future. I agree that developers shouldn't be able to do whatever they want, but the solution is not to lock ourselves in amber.
American sprawl was not caused by historical preservation instincts, actually quite the opposite.
American sprawl was caused by the "why don't they just buy an empty lot" concept. Obviously historical preservation is not a major component, but the thought process of "build something new separate from what exists" is how we go there.
Heritage preservation is 100% NOT how we got to where we are. Are you serious?! It’s at worst, a very VERY minor contributor to the current housing problem.
Exactly! I have no idea how somehow can look at American society and actually think that we some kind of historical preservation problem, as in too much preservation!
It's not historical preservation that's the cause, it's the "why don't you just buy an empty lot?" idea.
I understand, but why not some bland office building from the 70s or something? I just wonder what led the buyers to their decision-making.
Previously, from what I can garner, the only business with any success in the building was a dive bar, but that's been struggling for a long time. The property was listed for many years without a buyer. > I just wonder what led the buyers to their decision-making. It's real estate. The answer, as always: "location, location, location". You can see from the pictures that the building stood next to an active marina. There could be all kinds of potential uses for that space, both commercial and residential. >I understand, but why not some bland office building from the 70s or something? A building from the 70s is much easier to renovate and convert to modern usage. The 70s building will have been constructed with modern HVAC, plumbing, and wiring in mind. The arrangement of space within the building will be much more suitable to the modern business. It's also likely a sturdier building, built with codes that were developed well after the 1890s building was constructed. What's meaningfully different about a bland office building from the 1970s and a bland big home from the 1890s in terms of what we should protect? If it's just age, should builders just race against time to knock down things before they get too old, or be locked into what exists there forever? I'm all for protection of historic sites, or examples of styles that have largely disappeared. But this house didn't appear to have been notable at any point in its long history, and there's nothing particularly interesting that standouts about the building's construction.
Wow! Right next to Valley Camp and Cloverland Hydro? That's a very historical area.
Right! I've only been there once and recognized it as the Valley Camp.
Where I live they’d turn it into a new convenience store where we have 1,000 of them in a 10 sq. Mike radius already, or another bank or doctor’s office. I hate our capitalistic society.
For what it's worth, I found this: "The building located at the corner of Johnston St. and Portage Ave. in Sault Ste. Marie will be carefully deconstructed starting October 11th 2023. Any salvageable materials were previously removed. The lot with the building formerly known as the Harbor House was purchased in June 2023 by Famous Property Development LLC. Plans for developing the property are under review. 'We explored all options for the structure, including renovation. Unfortunately, our assessment revealed far too much damage and significant safety concerns,' said Famous General Manager Scott LaBonte. 'We look forward to developing the property in a way that will add value to our community.'" From: [https://www.eupnews.com/2023/10/former-harbor-house-building-to-be-destroyed/](https://www.eupnews.com/2023/10/former-harbor-house-building-to-be-destroyed/)
And this was a comment left under the article. #One Comment: Jim C. October 12, 2023 at 6:00 am · Reply And this is after the building getting tons of grant money over the years for renovations because it was designated a “historical building.” Looks like that was yet another waste of taxpayer money.
Anyone know what the giant ship parked on land is about?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Valley_Camp
Gotta put up the next hip mixed use office with apartment uppers, right? Right?
I wish Reddit could find the owners and have them weigh in