Quote:
Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian
Well, you do it alot... and some of us have been on this forum for years.
|
Sorry then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian
You're a bit idealistic. There are many issues with the heritage buildings: owners, condition, etc. Many in Granville mall were empty from what I remember.
|
Idealism is good.
Maintenance concerns and other issues can be dealt with, and are often (not always, but more often than not) worth the time and money in the long run, even when it might be logistically simpler to tear things down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian
I agree with you that they have value, but one of the major things we have discussed in this thread over the past 5 years is that there needs to be a mix of new development in order to support the old. Anything else is completely unfeasible.
|
The "mix of old and new" thing is true, but is so often invoked to justify demolitions, i.e. "We need old AND new, and can't keep every old thing around, so let's lose this one."
We all know Halifax has lost a LOT of its older building stock. At this point, I'm against pretty much any demolition of Victorian/Georgian/Edwardian brick or stone structures in downtown/central city, unless there's some very strong justification. (Like a truly world-class development, a legitimate safety hazard, a condemnable building, etc.)
This would not be especially onerous—we're not a city (anymore) with unbroken stretches of 19th-century building stock, and there are zillions of development sites that wouldn't be impacted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian
Primarily though, this is a skyscraper forum for those who are in favour of high density developments.
|
Pro-heritage isn't anti-density. And someone said a few weeks ago they think of it as more of an urban-design/planning forum, as do I.