Council needs to stop rolling over for developers

Dear Editor,

What a fine exposé by Joel Wittnebel in your July 6 issue of The Express in regards to the Harriet Cock heritage house.

Once again an example of an 1800s significant architectural structure that has the misfortune of being on a target line for yet another “land-raping” parking lot/shopping mall development. Haven’t we seen enough of these boring concrete edifices of wasted capital?

It’s always about priorities and empty promises by commercial developers (in this case, RioCan) hoodwinking city councillors by pretending to want to appreciate heritage and preservation, but when push comes to shove, it’s just “smoke and mirrors” and flimsy excuses about time lapsed and further disrepairs blah, blah, blah.

How about for once, a council saying, “if you wish to do business with us in the future and get our enthusiastic participation in future commercial endeavours, then you (i.e. RioCan) will honour the original plan for heritage preservation. Period!”

Why instead is it always just lip service to the concerned people, the heritage committees, the city councils? Why it can’t be done instead of yes it can be done? No excuse of, “it’s too unsound to save or support” is believable with the restoration technology of today.

It’s not too late. The house is still there.

Kudos to Joel, keep up the printed pressure when it comes to exposing forces like this one involving RioCan, which seems to be RioCan’t.

R.M. Hues