Why Would the UCP Demolish This Historic Building?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 сен 2024
- Alberta's government plans to knock down the former Royal Alberta Museum, replacing the magnificent Manitoba Tyndall stone structure with (more) green space. Many prominent Albertans are speaking out against the plan, including architect Vivian Manasc, who says the UCP is about to make a huge mistake.
3:00 | Vivian explains what makes the former RAM so special, and how it might be reimagined. Plus, we discuss the bigger picture - why do we knock down so many of our historic buildings?
CHECK OUT VIVIAN'S WORK: reimagine.ca/
36:20 | Ryan and Johnny talk about the choice to build the Real Talk studio in the historic Mercer Warehouse.
41:40 | A bunch of Real Talkers feel like they're not getting a fair shake in our coverage of the COVID vaccine, vaccine injuries, and the politics behind it all. Ryan speaks directly to some of the feedback we received after our August 13, 2024 interview with Professor Tim Caulfield, and reads emails from Gerald and Touring Zebra.
LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK: talk@ryanjespersen.com
FOLLOW US ON TIKTOK, TWITTER, & INSTAGRAM: @realtalkrj
REAL TALK MERCH: ryanjespersen....
RECEIVE EXCLUSIVE PERKS - BECOME A REAL TALK PATRON: / ryanjespersen
THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING OUR SPONSORS! ryanjespersen....
The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the host and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Relay Communications Group Inc. or any affiliates.
Heritage buildings should be preserved. We have seen a lot of that in Edmonton, where they get destroyed.
It's the worst! -rpj
So much so there's an entire art exhibit and book about demolished heritage MODERNIST buildings in Edmonton much less the styles and buildings that came before...
@@stickynorthIn other places, such as the United States, they don't allow this to happen.
Honestly I'd be worried about the contractors skimping on the asbestos removal... Quite a few Albertans have been shown to be penny wise and pound foolish, and the rest of us tend to suffer with that.
The cost issue you mentioned is covered in the video, actually. If you're going to spend the time and money already to de-asbestos a working building, you might want to consider spending zero dollars to just have it be a cheaper building.
If it makes sense to have green space there after, then I say go for it, but I'm not confident that the space will stay all that green, if the developers decide a five-over-one ends up being more profitable.
This has everything to do with keeping undesirables out of the area by which I mean the public... Even public viewpoints half a block away have been privatized by residents by spilling patio furniture and swings onto these spaces and putting up signs... Much like the battles for public beach space it's both illegal and immoral and yet entirely typical when it comes to public spaces in rich areas...
Due to the post-war boom in Edmonton after Leduc #1 in 1947, Edmonton is awash in Midcentury Modern architecture. The old Provincial Museum building in Glenora was built in the "Brutalist" style in 1967. Brutalism features minimalism, basic building materials and is monochromatic. it was first used in British post-war reconstruction to design low-cost utilitarian housing projects based on socialist principles. It had fallen out of favour by the late 70s when it became associated with "urban decay" and "totalitarianism". The public tends to find Brutalist buildings to be "concrete boxes" which are "cold" and "soulless" but a few architecture critics still praise the style. Exactly why a Brutalist building with a leaky roof and full of asbestos is a culturally significant building isn't clear to me. I suspect a lot of the pushback about the demolition comes from political foes of the current government who are outraged at everything they do.
I’m surprised nobody has suggested using the old RAM for much need education or healthcare facilities. The size would lend itself to that, plus the amazing educational opportunities from the unique stone….
The Mercer building is a lovely, old, tiny building that makes a nice home for some of the "local elite & connected folk", but wouldn't a 120 storey cutting edge design condo building for 10-20,000 people be a better use of that space?
More land speculation! Woooo! Can't wait for Boardwalk to just snap up the whole building and blame housing prices on immigration again!!! /s
Can we stop some UCP backed company from snapping up the housing the second it gets built, and then blaming the carbon tax? If not, additional housing is going to mainly line Boardwalk's pockets.
@@JonathanSicoli Oh, so an ND symp... Ok got to the bottom of it. Let's use tax dollars for my ideological whim and "save the RAM" goes the chant.
@@user-sm3ii5dk1u it's hilarious how you think that's an actual argument. Keep 'em coming, friend!
There's plenty of those around. Many of them are sitting vacant. -rpj
Everyone has great ideas on spending the taxpayers (your) money
Yeah! Better infrastructure than overpolicing, in my opinion!
If you don't like it, don't pay taxes.
@@JonathanSicoli Go ahead, stop paying your taxes and see what happens!!!
OUR money... It's a collective project... SMH...
@@stickynorth Yeah
Personally I'd rather have a rec center than like, 2000 extra dollars in my pockets
@@theowoytowich9959 I mean, tax cuts for the rich seem to be the main thing modern day conservatives push for. We're already seeing what happens.
Of course a building designed to be a functional "lump or concrete" will last 100 years, but is the building really of any architectural value? It is commercial/institutional architecture. We have phone exchange buildings, we have a power plant. We forget that our memories of activities and people we experienced within the building are NOT the building. It is a specific function, past its useful life building. In Alberta we haven't had the 100s of years of people with "showy" wealth, or gratuitous wealth for that matter. We didn't build the fancy nameplate buildings reflecting the ego of rich titans of industry. Plus, we lacked the population to build significant buildings. Our 4 storey brick buildings from 1900-1920 are lovely, but tiny, whereas the brick buildings in say New York & Chicago are 20-30 stories, the same lovely design, but much more ornate and well ordained. Do we build buildings today that will become Iconic Architecture for 100+ years? Hardly, and we talk about it now. We are a city of conservative, practical, "penny-pinching" builders and doers. We don't have the history of Italy, or the wealth of London. We have great business leaders, researchers, and builders that "found a need, and filled it." We didn't have the truly wealthy and egotistical who would build in marble and gold a building that is significant the world over. We have the wealth, we have the skill, we may even now have the desire, but will we decide that, apart from West Edmonton Mall, that we deserve to build buildings that the rest of the world looks at as prestigious examples of art and design, and covets for their own? We have the best in the world in many categories. But we never did decide to focus on building something worth something more than the current need. The Museum is an ugly lump of concrete tied to decades of memories. But it certainly doesn't have any value that is worth spending 100s of millions to retain. Keep Government House and bulldoze the box it came in from memory.
Honestly, I think it's still a functional building. They don't make them single use, do they? Renovate the interior if you wanna make condos out of it, but this "no architectural value" sounds like a load of bull. Any building can be reused. And, in fact, it's almost always cheaper to do so. I'm with the qualified architect on this one - this makes no financial sense.
@@JonathanSicoli Condos with no windows? The building is vast, yet has almost no windows. Would you take off the roof and replace it with the glass roof of the World Water Park? The site could easily house 4-6 towers of 50-80 stories of condos and parkland.
@@user-sm3ii5dk1u And yet, the government chose to replace the building with a green space. (Frankly, I do think that this is an excuse to then say "let's build condos" but currently the plan is for a green space.)
And, yeah, if I'm gonna be paying guys with massive diggers and sledgehammers, why not try busting out some window holes in the concrete? It's not like you're gonna be making more work. People repurpose old buildings all the time. What's the harm in trying?
@@JonathanSicoli It's ugly and too expensive to make safe to build in.
@@JonathanSicoli And who is going to pay for it???
What is going on with Alberta. Smith has gone left. Tearing down historic buildings?
How the f**k is that "left"?
@@squatch545because "conservatism can never fail, it can only be failed."