What this sounds like to me: "Rich people have money they can spend and should be allowed to do anything they want with it. Poor people get nothing and aren't allowed to complain."I've longed thought that historic preservationists should start walking the walk when it comes to their beliefs. They've been allowed to sit on the sidelines and micromanage little details to owners and developers who actually take the risk and use their own money to try bring new life to old spaces. This seems like a perfect project for preservationists to step up and put their own money on the line to make this project successful using their ideas.
Everyone can see the economic future of this building is an event space of some sort, if historic preservationist really believe that their ideas are better this would be a great first project for them to take on and tackle. Yes they would have to buy the building but if the HPC is able successful in stoping Abdul efforts I'm guessing he would be more than willing to sell.
Your further message clarified your point, and I agree with you that the HP crowd can be overbearing, but "historic preservation" is one aspect of public life where we as a society have decided that you aren't allowed to do anything you want just because you own a plot of land. For other examples, see "Environmental Protection", "Hunting rights", "Building Codes", and many others. You can find flaws in how we handle all of these things, but saying "Put up or shut up" is not a way to reduce those problems.