Comment 90026

By seancb (registered) - website | Posted July 08, 2013 at 14:32:51

I don't see much benefit in putting in the amount of work necessary to come up with this agreement simply to save the facades - and also put all of the legwork for drumming up support on the shoulders of those citizens who are already heavily involved in downtown rejuvination.

I would gladly financially contribute to saving these buildings, but I'm not about to cut a cheque to blanchard to have a disneyworld facade plastered to a glass box.

Graham, would you be content to have your gallery in a new building with some old brickwork glued to the front? That is not heritage and it does not solve the problem of wasting the embodied energy by demolishing fully built building. The stone masonry holding these up since the 1840s will hold them up for hundreds of years more.

Council should vote an intent to designate, forcing blanchard to either do this in a respectful way, or sell to someone who will. It's a simple solution, and any "compromise" is unnecessary at this point. The city and citizens no longer owe Blanchard anything. He has done his part to keep the core down and neighbouring values low so that he can play his land assembly game. We've given him enough.

If he wants to sell his tower idea, he can do so on the lots he has already cleared, and sell the functioning building stock to someone who understands heritage.

I vote down for offensiveness and up for humour. I cast no votes based on my level of agreement.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds