LowerBay
Active Member
Beyond the fact that I was broadly referring to "over 50 years old" (which could just as well be 100 years old, or certain items of greater architectural/historical distinction than others), it isn't a generational thing, it's a cultural thing.
Like, the fine folks who produce this are by and large (with some Steve Munro-type exceptions) of a younger generation than you, and they'd think you're an idiot for condoning vulgarian teardowns in Forest Hill. And so would their "new generation" successors 30 years from now, I suppose...
You'd be surprised. Just because you value 100+ year-old cockroach and termite infested housing, doesn't mean that everyone else does. It's a natural process of urban renewal. If they have the money and they want to tear it down and build something new in its place, so be it. It's quite obvious you've never owned an old home. Those older homes need constant work.
First Canadian Place, the TD Centre, Commerce Court and all those towers downtown weren't exactly built on vacant farmland you know. Are you saying we should have kept all those old buildings where those towers now stand?
And, as for whether the next generation will think yours is foolish and naive, it's pretty much guaranteed. They'll probably say, "oh, remember all those geeky streetcar lovin' poindexters living in 800 square foot shoe boxes downtown? ... how gauche".