People have a strong reaction to the construction, renovation or demolition of any building in their community.
Not just whether they think they’re ugly or not, but how they think the buildings should be used. One topic that comes up anytime we write about a building project is “affordable housing.”
But it’s necessarily a consistent message.
A story two weeks ago said a local developer has agreed to purchase the Good Counsel hill property, after the School Sisters of Notre Dame decided to move out and sell the expansive property.
The long string of Facebook comments were largely geared to the sentiment that “He’ll just slap up affordable housing” and ruin the charm and history of the property.
But a story last week about a developer buying the former Best Western Hotel building in lower North Mankato brought an onslaught of the opposite opinion: “It should be low income housing for the elderly and handicapped.”
Go figure.
I wrote a couple of Sundays ago about the differing opinions on what local buildings are ugly and why.
“The word ‘incongruous’ comes to mind when I think about some of the structures that have been built around Mankato since Urban Renewal in the ’60s,” one reader wrote to me.
The writer suggests city and community leaders often portray one view of what is valuable architecture but end up building ugly structures.
“When the city touts Mankato and what it has to offer, images of our courthouse, the Hubbard House, Stahl House, and the Train Station are the items used in brochures and on calendars. What is not bragged about are, what I consider, ugly buildings — such as the Profinium building. These new buildings, or poorly executed remodels of older buildings are the ones that won’t stand the test of time. Will they be here and valued in 100 plus years? I think not.”
The reader commended the owners of the buildings in Old Town for their efforts to repair and build with thought and a plan to blend in. The reader also doesn’t think the city does enough to help prevent deterioration of valued old neighborhoods, like the Lincoln Park area and other older neighborhoods where once grand houses sit.
In short, the writer said the city, which issues permits and decides zoning rules, should do more to encourage the preservation of structures and build new buildings that fit the history of neighborhoods.
North Mankato’s Tom Hagen, who has long and unsuccessfully pushed the North Mankato City Council to create an historic preservation commission, says the idea that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as far as architecture is concerned, is a lie.”
Beauty, he says, has qualities that can be discerned, like line, texture, symmetry, color, proportion, style, continuity, charm, placement in the natural landscape, use of natural materials.
Modern architecture, he said, ignores that, stressing rather the unique and innovative. “Our brains are hard-wired for the perception of beauty.”
He has plenty of opinions on much of the recent architecture and says North Mankato leaders have ignored consultants’ recommendations about approaches to historical buildings.
He considers the Marigold building ugly and the new bank on Belgrade out of proportion and lacking an entrance from the main business district.
“I cannot even bring myself to mention the new structures on the Mankato side of the river. Ghastly is the word that first comes to mind.”
The worst aspect of modern architecture is, he says: “If you dropped a person down in Mankato and were to ask them where they are in the country, they wouldn’t have a clue. It is all mindless, generic and meaningless, and makes truly civic life impossible.”
Tim Krohn is at tkrohn@mankatofreepress.com or 507-720-1300.