A few further thoughts triggered by my
recent column about the hoped-for restoration to health of the Ferguson
Building at 6th and Monroe in downtown Springfield:
The federal taxpayer significantly subsidizes such projects,
since the tax credit earned by rehabbing properties in officially designated
historic districts, as this one is, reduces the flow of money to the federal
treasury. Do The People get their money’s worth? I think so, but not always for
reasons usually offered.
One reason is energy. Old buildings embody all the energy
that went into their manufacture, including the baking of the bricks, the
mining and smelting and working of the steel, the shipping of materials to the
site, and so on. The energy required to build a building of same space would
add pointlessly to the atmospheric burden.
Then there is aesthetics. With rare exceptions,
history is not what makes these building valuable. Rather, it is their beauty,
materials and workmanship, none of which developers of this day seem unable to
match. Take a look at the original Ferguson Building. It is not a masterpiece,
as I noted. But think of any biggish office building erected in Springfield in
past 50 years. End of argument.
This article appears in Jan 7-13, 2016.
