Hysterical? You betcha.
Thanks to Todd Piccirilli for a thoughtful and balanced article on the Aylesford re-zoning issue. Too bad the editor chose such an inflammatory, sarcastic headline for the story (Hysteric Zoning [sic]).
On the contrary, the H-1 overlay is a rational, measured response to the cheap, ugly architecture that is being thrown up in the Aylesford neighborhood. These hideous vinyl apartment buildings, such as the new one being built across from Michler's Florist, not only disrupt the architectural consistency of this community, in my experience, they tend to attract short-term, uncaring residents who don't value things like community or aesthetics. The Aylesford neighborhood is quite right to use the zoning ordinances to put a stop to these eyesores.
The ACE editor's opposition to historic preservation in the Aylesford neighborhood is incomprehensible to me. I thought ACE was supposed to be an arts magazine!
Sincerely,
David Cooper
Elizabeth Street Neighborhood Association
The editor responds: First, Todd Piccirilli and I collaborated on both the headline and the subhead (as is the usual process here), and the correct headline was Hysteric Preservation? (though the question mark was obviously ignored, the headline was an admittedly bad pun, intended to set a tone for a story which proposed to ask and answer some questions about a debate that has become completely contentious and occasionally ludicrous). No apologies for sarcasm.
It is well known that I do live in Aylesford (which is why I "recused" myself from writing the story, and assigned it instead, to Todd, who lives outside the neighborhood and who did an excellent job of clarifying the debate). But as for my "opposition to historic preservation in the Aylesford neighborhood," that presumption is preposterous. Though my personal preferences are and were not an issue in this story, I certainly wouldn't choose to live in 1904 house if I were opposed to preservation. I am also no fan of the aforementioned "hideous vinyl apartment buildings." And my editorial and personal interest in preservation issues is well-documented in my previous series on "historic parking lots of the bluegrass" (an equally sarcastic approach, aimed against the would-be bulldozing of downtown). Ah, how quickly they forget...
This cover story was assigned in order to distill the arguments and encourage continued debate. It is not our intention as a newspaper to reiterate or regurgitate, but to encourage full participation in decisions which affect our community, instead of a spoon-fed diet of misinformation (sometimes perpetuated by those involved in a debate, sometimes by the mainstream media).
As for "short-term, uncaring residents," which seems like a euphemism for students, I choose to live in a college town and in a campus neighborhood. The students who live next door to me are uniformly polite, well-behaved young men who have just as much right to the street as I do.
No one at ACE is denying that H-1 can be a terrific asset to a neighborhood, but if the "problems" are apparently unwanted students along with definitively intrusive developers and absentee landlords, H-1 is not the solution.
As for the non-sequitur complaint, "I thought ACE was supposed to be an arts magazine!," allow all of us at ACE to put that misconception to rest right now. We are an alternative newspaper-and proud new members of the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. Although our commitment to critical arts and entertainment commentary remains strong, you would not be reading about zoning issues here at all, if ACE were an arts magazine.
Todd Piccirilli responds: While it's unlikely that "hideous vinyl apartment buildings" would be built if an H-1 overlay is approved in Aylesford, H-1 zoning, as I stated in the article, does not dictate land use. Thus, apartment buildings could continue to be built and targeted at the "short-term, uncaring residents," which Rhonda correctly identifies as a euphemism for students.
What is perhaps "hysteric" is not the practice of historic zoning (H-1 has meant the preservation of some wonderful and significant areas in Lexington), but that certain individuals see this [erroneously] as a means of running students out of the area.
Although the article pointed this out, I'm once again surprised to see that the reasoning offered in support of the overlay does not follow the true purpose of historic zoning. I believe that more people would support the proposal if someone, in addition to the city's preservation officer, Bettie Kerr, would cite architectural or historical significance as the primary concern here.
As of now, the debate is still revolving around the student population. Maybe a no less "hysteric" response to this would be a proposal to move the University of Kentucky.
[To summarize: H-1 will not prevent UK OR its students from encroaching on the neighborhood. It will not preclude duplexes, four-plexes or apartment structures. It will not dictate that repairs or improvements be made by absentee landlords, and may, in fact, deter responsibility in landlords who show admittedly ittle interest in improvements now, and perhaps less if a visit to the BOAR or commission were required. With this information, residents may or may not choose H-1 as viable, but they should at least be aware of both its benefits and limitations.]
Send Letters to the Editor (200 words or less) to: 263 North Limestone E-mail: editor@acemagazine.com |