Revere Hill Case Study

2. Other Factors to Consider in the Preservation of Cultural Property
In addition to the factors Merryman takes in account when considering cultural property, other property theorists have suggested elements to contemplate in the preservation of cultural property including, the inspiration cultural property and its preservation has on patriotism, the impact on the sense of community cultural property has, and the merit and integrity of architectural style of the cultural property. In this case, it makes sense to also consider these factors because of the role that Beacon Hill has played in the history of the U.S. and because as the BHCA there is a community that benefits and derives something from the cultural property here.
The basis for
The idea is that those items and architecture that have historic value to the U.S. should be preserved and maintained as a reminder of the great history of the U.S. and to unit all people in a national community. Beacon Hill as a historic district has been involved in very important moments for the U.S. as a nation, including the Revolution and also plays home to part of the Freedom Trail where people may follow the footsteps of some of the founding fathers as they fought to make this country free. The current bricks of the handicapped ramps maintain the connection with the past as well as keep the neighborhoods in Beacon Hill connected with the past as well, which points to preservation. However, the problem here is that do sidewalks make history and form part of the basis of a community? It seems that a nationalist
By placing in plastic red tiles, the City removes cultural property and replaces it with something that is completely out of context and as the BHAC’s lawsuit alleges, disrupts the community. The fact that cultural property would favor preservation over disability access shows a problem with thinking about decisions in terms of cultural property in that it largely eliminates thinking about other groups that are affected by the decision in terms of impact and use of the property as well as things surrounding the property. This is not a situation in which two or more groups claim the cultural property; it is a situation where the cultural property is given precedence over people. This does not look at the best interest of all people affected by the decision regarding property, but rather the preservation of the property itself, even if it comes at a cost to people makes it troubling to simply rely on this to make property decisions. Overall, looking at disability accessibility versus the preservation of cultural property does not yield easy answers and largely overlooks the need to use the property moving forward, which points to not looking at