• Sturgist@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Isn’t it also riddled with asbestos?

    One of the reasons I moved from Vancouver to Scotland was because I was sick of doing stonework on multimillion+ mansions. I work in Conservation here. It pays…well it pays like shit. But I get to work on buildings with proper history. We, North Americans, have a tendency to just knock things down instead of maintaining them.

    As an example, the oldest building in Vancouver is only 15 years older than the house I live in here…

    I think it’s really important that we maintain significant structures. Personally, I agree with you. 24 Sussex should be relegated to a museum. It should be restored, maintained, but it’s no longer suited to task.

    • Value Subtracted@startrek.websiteOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I think it might be asbestos-free now - they’ve spent the last few years gutting the place.

      But yeah, I don’t think I’d support tearing it down, despite the fact that the house itself supposedly isn’t considered architecturally significant.

      • Sturgist@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Architecturally significant and historically significant are totally different things. It was offered as a PM residence for less than 100 years, but it’s almost 160 years old, and that should count for something in and of itself.