Comment 75930

By MattJelly (registered) - website | Posted April 13, 2012 at 17:34:17 in reply to Comment 75929

I'd completely agree that it should not be the City's job to fund heritage restorations in every case- I'd settle for them properly maintaining and renovating the buildings they already own. I think it's at least worth pointing out that Council's original idea was for us to pay the same exorbitant lease rates for a replica of the Lister. Make no mistake, this was a sweetheart deal for LIUNA.

The City's role should have been in proper by-law enforcement on the building starting in the 80's and 90's, to ensure that it didn't decay to the point that it was so costly to restore. The City's role should be in preventing demolition by neglect, and for designating important pieces of historic architecture, at least to indicate that certain buildings should be restored, rather than left to rot.

I also have wondered whether we should simply take a renovated Lister and put it on the open market, and either make a profit, or recoup costs- to show that heritage preservation doesn't always just have to be a nice thing to do, but a profitable investment too. But I suppose what's done is done.

I will also say, I don't intend to deflate any of the positivity- everyone should feel good that we saved the Lister Block. Even Larry, Bill and Joe. Etc. etc.

I just feel that we should take that positive energy and devote it to a more permanent local culture of architectural preservation and adaptive reuse. The point is that it can be done, and that in most cases, it's worth doing.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

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

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools