Being completely outraged by the lack of respect Brantford has for itself, I had to vent in a public forum. The response was generally positive, but my grandmother was concerned about how I attacked the one council member.
An interesting side note, two days after the paper printed the following letter I attended a public planning session about the Grand River. Everyone had to wear the traditional name tag, and during the many group sessions I noticed other people pointing at my name. I was very confused because, at that time, had not realized my letter had been published.
Here is the letter published in the Brantford Expositor:
Living in and around the City of Brantford for that past 30 years I really should be surprised to hear another downtown building is labeled as unsuitable and scheduled for demolition – this is a city obsessed with the notion that through destruction we’ll find our salvation. Yet, I read last week that the Esquire Theatre, a marvel in art deco design, is to be torn down. Councilor Richard Carpenter is even quoted as saying he’d agree with a plan to “demolish every building on the south side of Colbourn”. What has this city done to deserve such disrespect to its physical history? How has Brantford wronged you Mr. Carpenter? Perhaps the most important rhetorical question: “Why does this always happen in Brantford?”
As a planning student I’ve taken special interest in Brantford and learned one very important aspect of heritage buildings: once they’re gone, they’re gone. If only this building had fur and big cute eyes it would be regarded as the true urban endangered species it really is.
Destroying the south side of Colborne (starting with this building) will be the culmination of failure that is the City Council. The ideology behind urban renewal – the act of city planning via demolition and rebuilding – doesn’t work and has never truly worked. The Eaton’s Mall, Market Street reconstruction, and the parking plaza are example of renewal attempts and all complete failures in architecture, cultural, and social concerns. Council should be looking into why downtown is not success, why it’s vacant and not allow classic brick to be replaced with steel and glass.
As a planning student I’ve taken special interest in Brantford and learned one very important aspect of heritage buildings: once they’re gone, they’re gone. If only this building had fur and big cute eyes it would be regarded as the true urban endangered species it really is.
Destroying the south side of Colborne (starting with this building) will be the culmination of failure that is the City Council. The ideology behind urban renewal – the act of city planning via demolition and rebuilding – doesn’t work and has never truly worked. The Eaton’s Mall, Market Street reconstruction, and the parking plaza are example of renewal attempts and all complete failures in architecture, cultural, and social concerns. Council should be looking into why downtown is not success, why it’s vacant and not allow classic brick to be replaced with steel and glass.
No comments:
Post a Comment