On April 28
according to the Sacramento Bee.Current owner Larry Otten was apparently “startled” when he heard this. I, too, was startled—not just that the restaurant was closing, but that it was closing without the owner’s input or okay.
I remember going to the Importing Company as a young girl with my mom to try a turkey special sandwich (which features cranberry sauce and stuffing—delicious). We were greeted by Mario Velo, who owned the business along with his brother Luigi until 1990, and still worked at the company. I believe he complimented me; I can’t quite remember what he said, but it was something charming, something suited for a little girl. It made me blush. I remember him to this day.
So I am extremely saddened that the business is closing, and that the building is being torn down. According to the Bee, Otten is looking forward to retirement, and I’m glad for him. Also, Michael Sampino, who owns Sampino’s Towne Foods, has apparently invited Otten to make sandwiches in his store. So the sandwiches and wisecracking customer service of Italian Importing Company may live on.
However, the building will not. This bothers me as much, if not more, than the fact that Italian Import Company is closing. The building, built in 1943, is arguably a part of Sacramento history. But developers want to tear it down to create affordable midtown housing for millennials. The proposed project, called 19J, is spearheaded by Nikky Mohanna and her father Moe. According to a Sacramento Bee article, the building could be one of the tallest in the city.
I understand the need for affordable housing in downtown and midtown, and I certainly don’t like the idea of building out into the suburbs more. I also understand that developers need to make money. However, how much is enough? Will we ever stop building? Why is it necessary to tear down old buildings to make room for new ones?
I don’t see why old buildings cannot be bought, refurbished and repurposed as affordable apartments for young professionals. Certainly I don’t see why a piece of history has to pay the price of progress, or why money is more important than preserving the past.
Saving the past is something at which Europe excels. Yes, there is much new development in Europe, but old buildings are not touched. Rather, they are updated, taken care of, and used. The United States seems to not have the same respect for history that Europe does. Maybe this is because the U.S. is such a young nation in comparison to European nations; maybe Americans are more focused on progress and innovation, owing to a more capitalist-leaning economic system.
Regardless, money and the future is not everything. Surely the past has its mistakes, but it also leaves much to be appreciated—ideas, art, and architecture. These things are important, and not only for their aesthetic beauty. New architecture is not bad, but we need to remember old architecture too—how our ancestors built homes and businesses, and lived. Indeed, I think historical architecture, just like anything historical, has the power to connect us to generations before us—and thus make us more aware of our own finiteness, the fact that we are just a few human beings out of billions and billions of humans who have ever walked the Earth.
The Italian Importing Company at 1827 J Street may be closing, but the building does not have to die, especially without the input of business owners and neighborhood residents. It’s time to change the way we view development in the United States. History is more powerful than we think, and if we see it only as something to forget and destroy, we are doing ourselves great harm.
I would like to fight against the tearing down of 1827 J Street, but I’m not sure how to go about this. If anyone has any ideas, please comment. Let’s at least let developers know that we value the past just as much as the future.