Urban renewal, historic preservation, and the Brighton pier

Today's NY Times has an article on the Brighton pier collapse (which we reported back on Dec 30).

Apparently there are those who feel the landmark pier should not be reconstructed; the president-elect of the Royal Institute of British Architects expressed his doubts thus:

"One needs to look at the right balance. When you come to virtually rebuild something, it is not the same as it was; it becomes a pastiche. The West Pier had already gotten past the point of no return, and now that it has collapsed, it is certainly past it. . . Piers were built for promenading, and we don't promenade in bustles and toppers anymore. The piers that are left have become very tacky experiences, so we should be thinking what we want piers for."

While the hesitance to rebuild is understandable, it should be recalled that a similar reluctance to put money into neighborhoods deemed hopelessly depressed and permanently unfashionable propelled the wholesale destruction of 1950s and '60s "urban renewal".
In hindsight, the planners of the era were tragically shortsighted. It may be equally shortsighted to write off the seaside resorts of England, depressed as they may be.

Posted by David on January 8, 2003 10:55 AM