Frequently, if not usually, renovating sufficiently old buildings is more expensive and difficult than new construction. Building codes and safety standards change a lot over the years.
Comment on Idibiks Oiho
Stovetop@lemmy.world 2 days agoSure, if you think it’s better to strip old buildings of value to make wealthy brick buyers happy instead of repurposing those old buildings for the public good of underserved communities.
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
humorlessrepost@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Holy strawman. I don’t support this for buildings that are being repurposed for the public good, I support it for abandoned buildings. Most in my town have been abandoned for decades and the owners refuse to sell.
Stovetop@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Sorry, not looking to be accusatory, that’s on me for my own lack of additional context.
Most of these buildings are abandoned due to white flight. The resources needed to support and maintain urban communities are disproportionately allocated to white, suburban growth, and the shells left behind were intentionally kept out of the hands of minority communities and left to rot.
In my area, a lot of old mill towns have had their mills be repurposed as community centers, offices, business hubs, etc. after the mills were left abandoned for a number of years. The latest project near me is a beautiful looking conversion for subsidized housing for 60+ year old residents.
humorlessrepost@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Ah, that makes sense. Here it’s just old failed restaurants and such with out-of-state owners who sit on the property, sending someone once a decade to do the bare minimum to keep the building from being condemned, hoping there’s a huge boom in property value eventually. I guess if they’re actually fully abandoned, as in nobody paying property taxes, the city or state can take steps to assume ownership.