Quote:
Originally Posted by O-tacular
I heard Michael Brown on NewsTalk 770 this morning and it didn't really sound like they were planning on preserving the Cecil so much as keeping elements of it like the sign. In this case I'm actually not upset as the building itself is in bad shape and just generally still represents a blight in most people's minds. He also said it was damaged quite extensively in the flood. He made a point of saying it was not a historic resource.
|
Although he said that, it's not true, it was evaluated and added to the historic resource inventory years ago.
That said, the debate shouldn't be about whether it's 'historic', but whether it's reasonable to preserve all or some of it.
I'd be ok with one or two facades and the sign.