Last night at the plan commission we approved the demolition of French Battery Factory in order to make way for new development (Union Corners). The French Battery Factory was the birthplace of what eventually became known as Rayovac . It was one of the city’s largest factories in 1924 and was said to have helped “spread the fame” of Madison Wisconsin. It is also where Charles F. Burgess worked who is the founder of UW-Madison’s Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering (Sorry, I’m sure there is better and more complete history somewhere, but that was what I was able to quickly find. A few photos here.)
Despite testimony from the Madison Trust for Historic Preservation and other testimony from the community, the plan commission decided to remove the building because it had a better site plan if the building was removed – not due to cost. So, we lose another historic building despite media reports early on to the contrary which stated:
He also plans to preserve the historic three-story, 330,000-square-foot former French Battery & Carbon Co. building on Winnebago Street. French Battery was renamed Rayovac in the 1930s.
When McGrath got his grants from the state, even Governor Doyle said:
“My Grow Wisconsin plan calls for investing in infrastructure and strengthening our cities,” Governor Doyle said. “With this grant, we will help McGrath Associates rehabilitate the former Rayovac French Battery building on Madison’s near east-side to create residential and commercial space.”
Anyone else feel cheated by early promises to save the building?
Sadly, I’m not surprised. What did surprise me was . . . the plan to save materials from the building and other buildings torn down and to build a replica/similar building on another portion of the site. Not move the building, not save major portions of the building, but build a replica with some of the same materials.
Why? What’s the point? And could people possibly consider this historic preservation? Granted, its a nice reuse/recycling of materials and that is to be commended. But can this possibly be considered historic preservation? If this is to be considered historic preservation by the community, we’ve sunk to an even lower low than the historic preservation-lite facadectomy.
