Preserving the city [of New Orlean]'s character... or not

Baltimore Sun photo.

This editorial, from the Times-Picayune in New Orleans, "Preserving the city's character," was pointed out to me by a colleague. From the editorial:

New Orleans is steeped in history, and its buildings tell the story of almost 300 years of life along the lower Mississippi River. Greek revival mansions, Creole cottages, high-ceilinged shotguns and Arts and Crafts bungalows all evoke a particular time and style. This place has more architecturally and historically significant houses than almost any U.S. city.

As New Orleanians move into the reconstruction phase of life after Katrina, it is crucial to salvage as many of those historically valuable buildings as possible. In that light, the proclamation issued by Mayor Ray Nagin to suspend the authority of city agencies that are supposed to sign off on demolitions of historic buildings is disturbing. The mayor apparently has not signed the proclamation to bypass the Historic District Landmarks Commission, its Central Business counterpart and the Housing Conservation District Review Committee, and he shouldn't. Such a move would be bad policy, and there is no reason to take such a drastic step.
__________________________
Once a building is demolished, it is gone forever. This is obvious, but why is it so hard to convince people that demolition and clearance should be the policy choice of the last resort, rather than the first inclination?