11-16-2017, 12:48 PM
I have no patience for this idea that heritage must be preserved in all ways at all costs from all change. When it starts to take away the future of an area's residents by choking them out, who are we even preserving this for? One of the most remarkable things about resilient cities (ones in Europe for which a 50 year old building would be "new" and a 250 year old structure would be a "recent imitator of classic architecture") is how they let the city live and breathe, and rarely does any of these cities of hundreds or even thousands of years old buildings feel as choked off as a neighbourhood of a bunch of private residences which might have hit three digits of age in a few individual cases, if lucky, with "heritage" often being defined solely as "built before I was born."