Comment 25641

By Mary Louise (anonymous) | Posted June 23, 2008 at 11:32:32

"Let's see if we can avoid straining this medical analogy: sometimes patients need an aspirin and bed-rest. Sometimes they need stronger intervention like heart/lung/organ transplants. Sometimes we have to acknowledge the ravages of age and just succumb to the inevitable just like the Balfour did.

Is the Lister this kind of patient? Not according to the Heritage Trust because it was once thriving."

It is not just the Ontario Heritage Trust Report that determined that the Lister can and should be saved. And the reasons for saving it are not simply because "it was once thriving" as you suggest, but because it went through a number of peer reviews conducted by independent architects and engineers who determined that the Lister was structurally sound and a prime candidate for restoration and adaptive reuse. At least one of the peer reviews made reference to the known economic benefits of preserving heritage buildings. I'm too lazy to provide links to all the reports here, but you can find them on the Architecture Hamilton website. (Click on Save the Lister.) The OHT Report is only the latest in a long line of reports recommending preserving the Lister, not just for what it once was, but for what it can be.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

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

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools