Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire
Modern design in the Exchange is fine, we shouldn't stunt the development of an entire neighbourhood for the sake of a couple three-week movie shoots a year. Even if the amount of movies being filmed here increased x10, it would still have a fairly minor economic impact relative to something that's permanently located in a building operating 365 days a year... don't fall for the magical Hollywood fairy dust.
That said, new buildings in the Exchange should be consistent with the overall built form of the area. A 30 storey skyscraper would look out of place on the Marketlands site. But that said, there is plenty of room for skyscrapers on the edge of the Exchange without necessarily being right inside the sensitive heritage areas... for instance, on Ellice, Notre Dame (the triangle site or closer to Calvary Temple) or right on Main where there are already some skyscrapers.
|
So you seem to be agreeing with I'm saying, which is it is important to maintain the integrity of the Exchange because it is a treasure and a national heritage site, and there are guidelines that go along with that, i.e., 30 storey highrises that Urban "Ken Zaifman" Recluse wants to build don't fit. And modern elements that don't affect the integrity of the district are fine. I never said anything about movies, although movie sets would be attracted to the area for obvious reasons. The Exchange is not national movie set district, and has not been protected because of movies. That's a red herring. It's a national "historic" site, which recognizes an historical district and collection of a certain type of architecture. Not unlike other Canadian cities, such as Quebec City. The overall integrity has to be maintained otherwise you have the phenomena of chipping away until that character, that specialness, is gone. But it doesn't mean modern elements cannot be introduced.