Local architecture has recently been brought to my attention. The issue at hand is what constitutes a building worth keeping around? What architectural style to we bring forward with us onto the future of design? And what truly defines Canadian architechure?
There is Currently a large amount of contaversy over weather or not to tear down certain down town Calgary buildings that are nearing 100years in age. Small apartment buildings are being destroyed left, right and center for the making way of large downtown highrises. how sad, but isn't this common sense, that in order for a city to thrive it must dispose of the old and make with the new, houses are torn down to create high rise apartment buildings for inner city dwellers, its a fact of city life!
For the most part i see that Canadians acting as though we were burning 500year old structures to the ground, as though we were wiping out all of our Europian architechual ansestory by demolishing a 90 year old apartment building with iron gate elavators, that although they appear to bring "character" to the building they also have a tendency to STOP OPORATING SUDDENLY.

This melding of the old with the new is the process that we must truly embrace
It is not the new that has brought us to the future but neither is it the old that will continue our advancment, therefore we must find the ultimate balance between the two.
So what then do we consider worthy of being "brought forward"?
There is a simple solution and a not so simple solution. If we wish to complicate things, then we will base our evaluation of building purely on their history. What have they helped us through, what do they represent today, and what is the nastalgic value of the peice? This is one sure fire way to complicate the hell out of ANY proceedure in life - the over analysing of a THING based on emotional connection-
The simple way of the future is much more productive. Can this structure be deemed safe, will it maintain its funchaionality, is it impedeing growth, and what is the monatary value of perserving it.
This line of thought would lead you to believe that the process is then simple... however it is still not peaches and cream. Unfortunately the value of the individual(s) making the decision will ultimately override all civilain values... that is a fact of day to day life.
But at least we have identified a system with which evaluating is made simpler.

A perfect example is the past/recent/future developement plans for Stephen Avenu
So what is Canadian Architecture?
Hard to Define?
A bad idea?
A motion towards claiming our global independance?
please comment on what you think Canadian architechture is.