Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P.
It's like most things in life - it depends. Few people would want architectural masterpieces torn down. There are damn few of those in Halifax though. Things like the Dennis fall into the middle ground - old, stone-built (a plus), mildly interesting architecturally, but not well kept up and as anyone who has been sentenced to work in it for any length of time can attest, a lousy, totally obsolete building from a functional standpoint. You can argue that case either way. But when you get into the majority of buildings that are getting torn down, it is an improvement. The reality is that economically it is not practical to save every old structure and restore it. That is the thinking that led to downtown not having anything built in over 20 years, and it is the reality that even those now-old buildings were constructed in during the 1800s and early 1900s - they replaced stables, older buildings from the 1800s whose use had been outlived, etc. You cannot stop progress.
|
I don't think anyone here is saying to stop progress necessarily. The prevailing sense I'm getting is that the progress we should be aiming for should be well thought out, beneficial to both the developer and the surrounding community, and - dare I say - pretty, or at least something you can be proud to say is in our city. The revitalization of an older building into something more modern that can continue to stand the test of time, shouldn't be viewed as anti-progress. So many of these new developments are uninspired slabs. They're going to look worse in 10-20 years than the buildings they replaced! I mean, you can only make precast panels and glass windows look so many different ways. Do bricks and stones not exist anymore? Yes, they're more expensive, but couldn't you fetch higher rents or sale prices if the building is indeed of true architectural beauty and quality?
Threaded Mode