Comment 89989

By seancb (registered) - website | Posted July 07, 2013 at 09:28:30 in reply to Comment 89986

I find it troubling that David Premi and his architectural firm are willing to quietly step aside and let this demolition happen. Urban architects are supposed to stand up for the maintenance and enhancement of the built form and should respect their predecessors as much as (if not more then) their successors.

Up until a month or two ago, dpAi occupied (and routinely spoke proudly of) the second floor of one of the buildings that is all of a sudden "done, just done" in the words of David Blanchard.

I'd like to hear Premi's professional opinion on the state of these buildings, and their ability to be used/renovated.

Unless I have my sources mixed up, dpAi even created the initial "renderings" (pictures of boxes) for an imaginary development that is not even approaching the planning stage - a drawing that the Spectator happily published to help Blanchard sell this demolition to the public.

How can a downtown architecture firm show such blatant disregard for the city they are supposed to support (and the city which supports them)?

How can our city's only daily newspaper - which relies on an engaged news-hungry public for its very survival - print story after story of unquestioning faith in Wilson-Blanchard's plan-less plans? Stories which will do their part in securing the fate of these buildings, and interrupting the momentum building in the core.

"With friends like these, who needs enemies?"

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds