Comment 13766

By Rod (anonymous) | Posted November 08, 2007 at 10:12:38

I share Bob's opinion of your piece. Nicely Done.

However, I take issue with this lone paragraph, "I am not defending the residents opposing this proposal. One can guess from their monster houses, lush lawns, luxury marques in the driveway and signs like the one above that their opposition is mostly aesthetic in origin."

Why marginalize this group? Does an appreciation of beauty and space, and the resources to achieve that outcome deserve vilification?

Would the city be better served, if these large lots were carved up into homogenized zero-lot building tracts? Would the “Brow Lands’ be better for that outcome?

Ultimately, the aforementioned(Browlands), may be the result of what you rightly describe as “Bad Intensification”. The owners of these homes are economically mobile - if they don’t like what is occurring in their neck of the woods, they will pull up stakes and move on -leaving more opportunities for the developers to carve up the distinctive for the homogenized building tracts that assault our senses everywhere.

As a recent emigrant to your city from the holus bolus sprawl of Alberta - I’m at once impressed at the cultural resistance to the developementlism which has overtaken the ‘wild rose province’, and dismayed at the indifference towards this insane proposal for developing what should belong to all Hamiltonians.

As you so aptly put it, “it is a gem” and it should be considered as such - a diamond in the rough, to be studied by a master gemologist and precisely cut for the pleasure of all denizens of this wonderful city, and shame on us, if we stand aside and let opportunistic carpetbaggers destroy a cultural treasure.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

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

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools