Comment 82239

By seancb (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2012 at 18:30:15 in reply to Comment 82215

There's no subtext to the article. Walk through Gore Park and look at those buildings. They are most certainly NOT falling down. Buildings in worse shape have been renovated by people with a lot fewer resources than Blanchard has.

I am advocating for repairing and using the buildings that already exist in the city instead of tearing them down under the pretense of "development" based on a bunch of pictures that mean jack squat without plans, permits and actual investors.

My reasoning goes well beyond pretty facades. It's about the efficiency of reuse rather than replacement. It's about wanting to live in a city that encourages landlords to keep their properties up instead of rewarding them for neglecting them to the point of demolition. It's about having a downtown that offers something for everyone. Not just glass walls and new condos.

If you've read anything deeper from my opinions, I'm sorry that you misunderstood.

If you take offense to the idea that the city should avoid scaring the younger generation away, then I have to ask you: how do you expect any city to continue providing things such as running water and functional roads if we let all of our tax revenue disappear as people retire or move?

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds